« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Will Hillary Clinton supporters vote for Monica Lewinsky?
It's a familiar story: the dutiful mother stands at her husband's side through thick and thin, supports him emotionally, raises his children - only to be cast aside at the height of his prosperity and success for the vapid young thing with nothing going for her but a pretty face. The children feel betrayed, and turn away from Dad.
If it didn't happen in your family, you know a family where it did.
Supporters of Hillary Clinton are already familiar with this story: Clinton's already been the victim of a philandering husband who's set her aside for a younger woman. It's already happened in McCain's family, too. He dumped his first wife like a hot potato after becoming a celebrity upon his return from Vietnam. He took up with a rich and pretty wife instead.
Now McCain's done it again, symbolically, with his VP choice.
For some reason McCain thinks that Palin is a good substitute for having Hillary Clinton on a presidential ticket. A woman is a woman, right? I predict this will backfire.
Hillary's supporters don't love her because she's a woman. They love her because she's Hillary: she's smart, independent, funny, rambunctious, and she's got the qualifications. She's put in her dues, has a law degree from the best law school in the country, and she stands toe to toe with the great politicians of the world.
In 1992 Hillary Clinton said, "I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas, but what I decided to do was to fulfill my profession which I entered before my husband was in public life." To me, this is one of the defining moments of Clinton's public persona, and I admired her immensely for it. I suspect her die-hard supporters from the primaries remember this moment too.
Palin won a beauty contest. She was on the PTA. She's a minor politician of one of the smallest states in the country. Quite frankly, she's not fit to lick Hillary Clinton's shoes. She's no substitute, no replacement: the very idea is an insult to Hillary.
John McCain thinks that, in the minds of Hillary's supporters, she's interchangeable with a young, pretty no-account who wears lots of make-up. That's the kind of mistake that can only be made by a man who's already left one wife for a younger woman.
But Sarah Palin will remind voters less of Hillary Clinton and more of Monica Lewinsky. Clinton cannot be so easily replaced.
Comments (63)
Gee, and I thought I was the only one who picked up on McCain's "dirty old man" vibe. In addition, any picture of McCain with Palin is going to be a dreary, nagging reminder of every single one of his 72 years. And every time that reminder is brought up, then his greatest weakness is exposed to his own constituency - whether he will survive if elected.
August 29, 2008 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look at the video of her speech yesterday. What does he keep looking down at while he's standing behind her and fiddling with his wedding ring?
He is clearly looking at her ass.
August 30, 2008 8:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama supporters are suddenly full of praise towards Hillary. Why didn't you praise her as "smart, independent, blah blah blah" during the primaries? Hypocrites.
August 29, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
All we needed was a proper comparison. She is qualified to be President and has great experience compared to Sarah Palin who is a nice woman way in over her head.
August 29, 2008 8:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or more to the point, Hillary was competing head-to-head with Barack Obama and the other presidential candidates. In the midst of a hard-fought campaign, Hillary (even though we may have disagreed with her), was not the "token" woman in the race, just as Barack Obama was not the "token" African American. Each brought a unique set of experience and vision for the country to the campaign.
The same cannot be said of Sarah Palin, who is more akin to Harriet Miers, appointed by Bush to be, originally, the token replacement for Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court. Just as Miers was no O'Connor, Palin is no Clinton.
August 30, 2008 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually Obama did praise Hillary constantly during the primary and continues to praise her.
I have no idea how Hillary supporters, or former supporters will view Palin, but I suspect their reactions will vary. Personally I wouldn't compare her to Monica Lewinsky because she seems to be very much her own woman and to have high moral principles, even though I don't share many of her values. I'm sure she would be highly offended by the comparison!
In fact in some ways I'm liking what I'm reading about her and how she has fought the entrenched old-boy network up there, and the special interests. That can't have been easy for a woman. She seems very real and down to earth and like a colorful character. I like the big hair and glasses, but wonder how long before we see a total makeover.
I like her in the same way I liked Huckabee, as a person and a character, while disagreeing with almost everything they both believe in and stand for! She will certainly make the campaign more fun than any of the other potential Republican VP choices would have.
August 29, 2008 9:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know about the high moral principles and character bit. As I understand the accusations at this point:
-She used her office to try to get a trooper fired for personal reasons;
-She fired the Director in charge when he refused to do as she wanted;
-She covered it up when pressed;
-She hired a political supporter in spite of the fact that there were proven allegations of sexual harassment against him;
-She funneled a cushy state job with the Department of Transportation to a political contributor.
I guess that at least she's got her Republican bona fides.
August 29, 2008 10:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Some of us did. A lot of people, like you, who took offense at the ugly comments made about Senator Clinton, tended to notice and remember the insults more than the compliments. I suppose that's human nature.
You're right that there are more compliments to Sen. Clinton from Obama supporters now that the nomination is done. I think that's natural -- now that they're no longer adversaries, people who are emotionally invested in Obama's candidacy find it easier to view Sen. Clinton in a more favorable light. I believe we would see the reverse version of this had Clinton won the nomination.
August 29, 2008 10:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know a lot of Obama supporters with praise for Hillary during the whole primary. For most of the primary, most people I know, liked her also. We just liked him better. Towards the end she did some things to really turn me off, but that doesn't change the fact that I admire her and agree with many of her policies. That doesn't mean I want her to be president over Obama. Just like I admire Sarah Palin for her brilliant leadership on the PTA. Heck, I couldn't do it. Doesn't mean i want her to be VP over just about anybody else.
August 30, 2008 5:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
For hillary:
The president always has the upper hand in Supreme Court appointments
We all know the next president will nominate 2 and possible 3 Supreme Court justices.
Even with a democratic congress, the president has the advantage because the president chooses who comes before the confirmation committee. Sure a democratic congress might be able block the most extreme justices but a justice does not have to be extreme to be dangerous.
Roe v Wade and other womens rights is one justice away from being overturned
The court is currently split, 4 conservative, 4 liberal and 1 moderate justice (Kennedy) providing the swing vote. Yes, Roe v Wade and other women’s rights is one justice away from being overturned. The next 3 justices to retire are the 2 liberal and the one moderate.
If the next president is a Democrat the alignment of the court remains as it is today, if it is a Republican; the court will have 7 conservative and 2 liberal justices.
If John Mcain and Sarah Palin become president and vice president, the conservatives will be ecstatic. Why, presidents come and presidents go but a Supreme Court appointment last 20-30 years. Long after john McCain and Sara Palin are gone; a conservative supreme court will be the gift that keeps on giving.
For those who may say I am a social conservative, I would welcome a conservative court, keep in mind that the supreme court decides far more cases that affect women (Equal Pay, Title Nine, Workplace Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, etc) than it does social issues.
Those who do not learn from history will learn, suffer the consequences.
August 30, 2008 9:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Most Obama supporters I read would have voted for Hillary had she won. We picked a different vision for the country. That neither negates Allburg's argument nor makes him a hypocrite.
August 30, 2008 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
"But Sarah Palin will remind voters less of Hillary Clinton and more of Monica Lewinsky. Clinton cannot be so easily replaced."
You are so full of shit, your post is totally funny. Reading your concluson, it's obvious you have no idea how and what motivates Hillary supporters.
In fact, YOU remind me much more of Monica Lewinsky than Sarah Palin will probably ever do.
Because you both suck.
August 29, 2008 7:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
You want to enlighten me lalo? I think it's pretty offensive myself.
August 29, 2008 7:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Try this, little baby, whatever Palin's lack of experience, she is a professional - a governor of a state. Comparing her for no reason with a 22-year-old in her first real job who got herself in a sex scandal is oozing with disrespect for women.
August 30, 2008 5:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nice to see that you've really thought through the nuances of your response. Impressive!
August 29, 2008 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really hadn't looked at it in the sense of her being the prettier, younger woman who the more seasoned, smarter one gets cast aside for. That's a really good point. The implied interchangeability though hit me right away and I think lots of women will be offended by that. It definitely makes things more interesting but I just don't see her in any way as being fit to step in and run our country and command our military at a moments notice. Not for a second. I think it was a foolish pick. My kneejerk reaction upon hearing it was that it was clever, but upon closer scrutiny I've totally changed that view.
August 29, 2008 7:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here is a lovely graphic for those trying to figure out who Sara Palin is:
http://www.236.com/news/2008/08/29/sarah_palin_arouses_conservati_1_8584.php
BTW did you know that McCain only met Sarah Palin once? Way to make a critical choice. Even I had to go through several interviews for my job.
August 29, 2008 7:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
And here is a photo:
http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-70600
August 30, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
God, that is spot on. I picked up on that implied thought process as well.
As I said on another thread, Hillary's the real deal. Voters who are disappointed that they didn't get to vote for a woman -- one of Hillary's caliber -- are not going to see this as a suitable substitute. In fact, they may see this as an obvious and insultingly lame attempt at pandering.
August 29, 2008 8:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I suggest asking women who are not Obama supporters like you, who are sitting on the fence, or who are Hillary supporters.
I think you are making the same mistakes as Allsburg is making:
- dismissing a woman. The pleasing "Hillary caliber" qualifier could ring a little hollow now given the treatment that Hillary was given.
- assuming that the argument over a woman on Obama's ticket would work equally well for a woman on a Republican ticket
- ignoring the merits of Palin, if any, that other women could see
My personal view is that this "lame pandering" is not the primary reason she was picked.
Their narrative is going to be - two mavericks, reformers, both with track record, running against the Celebrity and Washington Insider.
Unfortunately, Palin can only be dismissed if SHE screws it up. Not if we get in the face, forget decency and wish her to go away.
August 29, 2008 8:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep, you nailed the narrative Lalo. Rove & co saw Experience wasn't gonna beat Change, unless Obama drastically screwed up. He didn't. Far from it. But "Maverick" had them in the "Change" game, so they've furthered it.
NO, she's not gonna win - nor was she targeted at - SERIOUS Hillary-backers. There's a lot of Undecideds & Independents there, and big chunks of 'em vote for pretty wild reasons. She's into hockey? Great! She shot a wolf? Cool! A Mayor? I LIKE small towns! She played her Championship BB game on a fractured ankle? Wow. The Republicans will trot her out in THEIR settings, run their ads, their interviews. So, yeah, she may be vegetable matter, intellectually, and a fawn, in experience terms, compared to Hillary. But I sure couldn't see anyone voting for someone who was less educated or experienced, eh? My God. She can't even pronounce nuclear.
August 29, 2008 9:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is a lot of buzz in the republican blogs about the Obama Palin comparison. I was a little bit surprised at first, since she's only a VP candidate.
The comparison basically goes like this: Palin is a better version of Obama.
Fighter of establishment, Washington outsider, new to political scene, has strong convictions and principles.
Her gender is rationalized as the equivalent of Obama's race, i.e. something unique that informs and defines the candidate.
If this is the image that is told to the public and that sticks in the voters' minds, then I think she will have an important role to play in McCain's campaign - and I bet the "Maverick + Maverick" narrative will be persuasive for a lot of people out there.
Many of these undecided voters are men. But as we know the majority of them are women. They will know that only a man could come up with Palin=Monica comparison, no matter the intent.
August 29, 2008 9:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
You do not understand women. As the received wisdom tells us: "No woman has a worse enemy than her best friend." And if you don't believe me, ask Monica Lewinsky what she thinks of Linda Tripp. As many women will vote against another woman out of sheer jealously and spite as will ever vote for her out of sisterly solidarity: an oxymoron in itself.
As I should not have to inform even a sub-educated planaria worm: hard-right Republican women detest Senator You-Know-Her, and their reactionary Republican Party fairly salivated at the prospect of publicly reviling You-Know-Her and her philandering, ex-president husband all over again one more time this November. But Barack Obama's hard-earned success robbed them of yet another political pound of flesh from the erstwhile Partners in Pathos. Consequently, the rabid mistress/mothers of America have seized upon this utter nobody hockey-mom from Alaska as a stalking horse substitute for inflicting yet more hormonal tsunamis of their unrequited disdain on the never-forgiven Bawl and Pillory Horror Picture Show. If they cannot spit in You-Know-Her's face directly, they will do so indirectly.
Panama-John McBush may even understand this perverted psychology or else had it explained to him by his trophy mistress wife. She ought to know. And even better for seven-home Cindy, a new trophy-nurse running mate will save her the trouble of changing Grandpa McBush's diapers every time he pisses all over himself trying to play commander-in-briefs. A breast-feeding hockey mom with an abandoned Down's Syndrome infant at home will know just what to do and won't mind doing it.
Deputy Dubya Bush's America has lowered expectations for itself so low that we now disappoint the world even when it expects nothing of us.
August 30, 2008 4:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
I can't figure out your meaning here.....? Hillary's education and professional background, as well as her professional and community service achievements, are far superior to Ms. Palin's. Anyone who would attempt to dispute this would look absolutely insane. She is obviously not as accomplished as Hillary Clinton.
That's not my thinking at all. I see this as a cheap ploy by opportunistic Republican strategists to manipulate any of Senator Clinton's supporters who are not already committed to voting for the Democratic nominee.
Not exactly. Palin will deliver some votes, and she may appeal specifically to some women because she's a female candidate. But Palin's positions on the important issues of the election are so contrary to Senator Clinton's, she will likely not be attractive to people who supported Clinton.
Here I completely agree with your prediction. However, Palin, impressive as you and others might believe she is, doesn't help John McCain shore up an area where he (and the Republican Party) are perceived as weak -- competence in economics and a willingness to give top priority to an economic policy plan that will provide real relief for specific anxieties among the bloc of voters who will deliver this election -- undecided moderate independents. These voters are increasingly anxious -- they're worried about losing their homes, paying for health care or having adequate coverage, not having enough money to just make ends meet, not being able to save for kids' college or retirement, etc.
I think McCain's campaign is flailing and they're opportunistically trying to do two things: (1) reclaim McCain's "maverick" image, and (2) peel away female voters who wanted to vote for Hillary.
My comment was that it's ridiculous of them to think a woman candidate -- any woman candidate -- might be a suitable "substitute" for some of Hillary's supporters. As if Hillary can just be replaced -- especially by a candidate like Sarah Palin (not intended as a slight, but she's not in the same league).
Yeah, I hear the implied sentiment: "A woman is a woman, right?"
August 29, 2008 10:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
"...My comment was that it's ridiculous of them to think a woman candidate -- any woman candidate -- might be a suitable "substitute" for some of Hillary's supporters..."
That's what I was disagreeing about. I don't understand why some Obama supporters are trying to explain everything as it was some kind of sice rack, where everything neatly fits into assigned place.
I don't think it's ridiculous of them to think this way at all. Because you don't know why Hillary supporters support Hillary. You think you know, but you don't. It may be a whole mix of reasons, starting with her qualifications, but could also include the sisterhood identify, the fighter identity and a million other things.
It could also be a very simple ambivalence about Obama that was expressed through Hillary. It may be a character consideration.
Whatever it is, I doubt it's a simple neat one-sentence rational explanation.
And as a Hillary supporter, I honestly cringe in disgust when the same people who daily dragged her through mud on this blog are now proclaiming her a saint, while trying to do a Hillary 2.0 on Palin.
August 29, 2008 10:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
No one will ever accuse you of doing a 180 on your own whacked beliefs, lalo.
August 29, 2008 10:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whacked or not, I have beliefs. Treating women the way you do is not one of them.
August 29, 2008 10:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, you and I are in agreement that there are a variety of things that motivated people to support Hillary. We're individuals, after all, and can't be neatly tucked away, like you say, in a spice rack.
As a side note, I generally dislike labeling people like that. But that seems to be the way campaign strategies are formulated. It is insulting in a way, true enough.
Lalo, I am not one of the people around here who insulted Sen. Clinton during the primaries, so (following your own conscience, here) I ask you to not put the label on me that I'm just another one of those insensitive "Obamabot" jerks. It really pisses me off. I try to be fair and empathetic, and I don't like having to bear the burden of bad karma for other peoples' sins!
As for any contempt you perceive on my part toward Palin, let me clarify. It's not Palin for whom I feel contempt. Not at all. It's the Republican Party and McCain's campaign that has my extreme distrust. I smell Rove behind this move. I can't help it. I think he has taken over the empty space that used to hold the soul of the Republican Party.
August 29, 2008 10:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's see...
You're cheering a post that insults both Hillary, Palin and Hillary supporters, in the headline alone.
But you're not one of the jerks because you yourself are not using the words, only nodding in agreement?
Did I get this right?
August 29, 2008 10:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Since you ask, I don't particularly like the angle that uses Monica Lewinsky.
If you'll notice, I commented on a single sentence of the post:
I can't read your mind, Lalo -- are you attempting to read mine? Are you presuming that my comment implies I agree with and approve of every other sentiment expressed in this post? Because that's....well...presumptuous.
August 29, 2008 11:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
You-Know-Her dragged herself through the mud when she stupidly let a dyslexic dwarf chimpanzee like Deputy Dubya Bush make a monkey out of her authorizing his stud-hamster vendetta against the toothless Saddam Hussein in Iraq. She made matters worse when she taunted anti-war Vietnam Veterans like myself with: "If you don't like my vote to authorize war on Iraq, then you can vote for someone else." So I -- and millions of other Americans like me -- did what she arrogantly invited us to do. She asked for what she got and now must live with it. Her hapless hubby didn't help, either, when he crowed: "I have always defended President Bush against the Left on Iraq." He got what he asked for, too.
However, You-Know-Her now seems poised to accept her accountability and work as a loyal Democrat for the election of Barack Obama. In this way, she may sincerely recognize her own culpability and seek to make amends for it. I think many former opponents of rewarding her for her colossal lack of judgment may now reconsider her for future leadership of the party. This represents no inconsistency on the part of those who supported Barack Obama, since both he and You-Know-Her have both gone out of their ways to work co-operatively in the interests of Democratic Party success.
If an implacable veteran of the Nixon-Kissinger Fig Leaf Contingent can now give You-Know-Her a second chance, then anyone can. But the bizarre and secretive appointment of a complete nobody as vice presidential nominee -- regardless of gender -- by Grandpa Simpson McBush just insults intelligence and responsibility itself. I raised two sons largely by myself and coached youth soccer as an unpaid volunteer for ten years. So what? I have far more and better qualifications for President than this yokel from the frozen tundra, yet I seriously doubt anyone will ever nominate me for the job. But demanding that I ratify McBush's imbecility with my vote just adds injury to intolerable insult -- whatever or however You-Kow-Her and/or her supporters think about anything.
August 30, 2008 5:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am pretty willing to bet that they believe in Science. After all education is key, and having sound science being taught in our classrooms is paramount.
I don't think many Hillary supporters deny global warming, or that creationism should be taught side by side with real, peer reviewed science so the kids don't know the difference - however Sara Palin does.
Hmmmm. How many Hillary supporters will support Pailin just because she has the potential to break that ceiling regardless of how ill prepared she would be for the job?
I will go out on a limb and say most are intelligent enough to see through a GOP pander and should feel that the McCain campaign has insulted our intelligence.
August 29, 2008 11:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I could not agree more. As a young woman, I am very offended. Hillary is the real deal and I can think of some (two) republican women who are the real deal, but not Sarah Palin. This morning she said that she never had interest in getting into public service in the first place. Her lack of a law or history education is glaring. The only thing she's done that seems maverick like is standing up to corruption (but shouldn't that be a threshold we expect of any president). I do not want to see the first woman in this position get handed the job only because she is a woman. As a democrat, I should be happy about this stupid decision but I'm worried that it's not as stupid as I think it is. And as an American, I'm scared. Let's just hope she's got the nerve, leadership and intelligence to be our commander-and-chief if God forbid, we need her to be someday.
August 29, 2008 8:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you want to see her sitting in the White House, you should cheer the initial reaction from the Obama campaign and the blogosphere:
- Palin is a nobody
- Palin is chosed for her vagina
- Palin will do and say anything to win
- Palin is Alaska's answer to Monica Lewinsky
August 29, 2008 8:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama's press secretary's initial comment was dismissive. After which Obama, unusually for him , sought the NPR reporter to make a different, positive statement.
There'll be a lot of negative comments here but the Obama campaign's official position from now on will be his positive one. In addition of course there'll be lots of negative comments here but those don't represent the campaign altho of course McCain supporters will say they do.
August 29, 2008 10:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
The strange venomous Hillary holdouts, those women we see on camera, women like Harriet Christian, are deranged. I have no idea what their attachment to Hillary is based on, and fully believe they will vote for anybody other than Obama.
I do not, hoever,think there are that many of these lunatics, despite the media's longing to tell that story, and I don't actually believe McCain had simply these deranged women in mind.
Far more important to McCain and the Republicans is the fact that he doesn't have the Christian base solidly behind him. In bible thump land, he's been losing 5 - 7 percent of the Republican vote to Bob Barr.
If Palin can deliver these votes to McCain, and the Christian right LOVES her, that will be quite a bump. And that's the real danger. Do the math.
August 29, 2008 9:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
How funny.
"I have no idea what..." is almost always followed by "deranged".
August 29, 2008 10:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
And as a Hillary supporter, I honestly cringe in disgust when the same people who daily dragged her through mud on this blog are now proclaiming her a saint,
I think what you meant to say is "when the same people who were completely disgusted by Hillary's endorsement of McCain are now willing to put that all behind them, even while McCain is flogging the airwaves with those very words, in the spirit of unity that Obama and Hillary and Bill have made possible, while I, Lalo, on the other hand, still feel the need to wallow in my own bitterness."
HTH
August 29, 2008 10:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, I don't want to judge anyone, because we've all got good intentions here.
But Lalo has a point. We should be a little cautious about describing Palin as a "token" or a "pretty face." She's a governor, though a recent one, and we shouldn't reduce her to her gender -- even if that's the way McCain may be thinking.
I think it might be less controversial, and more fruitful, to talk about McCain's vetting process, which seems to have been extremely thin. He just talked to her on two occasions, one of them long ago, one of them very brief, before tapping her for the most important job in the world. He seems to have outsourced much of the decision process to Rick Davis.
That's classic Bush-era priorities: politics first, governance a distant third.
August 29, 2008 10:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, and I think it might be even more fruitful to talk about what McCain/Palin administration would mean for all voters and for this country.
That's what Hillary, Bill, Al Gore and others did in Denver, so damn well.
But now that it's over, we're back to being such good practioners of Rovian tactics we despise.
August 29, 2008 10:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please note that we = a bunch of people venting on a blog.
The "we" who matter, Democratic leaders, are focusing pretty much where you think we should focus.
August 29, 2008 11:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the distinction and the sane statement.
August 29, 2008 11:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let me also add that we (people venting on a blog) seem to be getting ourselves more overwrought than the situation warrants. IMO. Anxiety is running high at TPM Cafe.
August 29, 2008 11:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm offended at the comparison of the real Monica Lewinsky to Sarah Palin!
Doing this, you're associating John McCain's taste for the receptionist-turned-executive assistant-turned lobbyist Vicki Iseman, or for blondes half his age, with Bill Clinton's assignation with an intern! Just because McCain's wife and veep are beauty queens, is no reason to discuss the perception of some leaders that women are sex objects!
Bad baby!
August 29, 2008 11:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dead on, great analysis.
August 30, 2008 12:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have a hard time believing that I agree w/ Paul Begalia, but he hit the nail on the head. Palin cannot be the one attacked. It has to be McCain's judgment in choosing her. He called the decision
August 30, 2008 12:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Dang...should have been...
and I have to agree 100%. This was an egregious political act that put personal gain way ahead of the country. McCain has some nerve saying that Obama puts his political ambitions above the country, then pulling a stunt like this. Watching the Republican spokespeople defend it w/ straight faces was hysterically funny, so why did it make me feel like crying?
August 30, 2008 12:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
reverse the criteria to how many blacks support obama who are moderates and conservative just because he's black. thousands...enough said
August 30, 2008 12:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't buy it. If blacks want a black candidate to win so badly they'll be willing to vote against their ideological preferences, we'd have seen Alan Keyes get A LOT more votes over the last coupla decades.
August 30, 2008 12:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
The difference here is that blacks are supporting Obama because he represents them as a constituency and is a progressive. Why are blacks by and large progressives? Easy answer: civil rights, nondiscrimination, anti-poverty legislation - it is in the best interests of the majority of blacks, who are an oppressed class, to vote for Obama, who is wielding a progressive agenda.
However, Palin is far more comparable to Clarence Thomas - she is pro-life, does not believe in evolution, is against abortion on the far right wing where abortion should not be performed even in cases of rape or threats to the life of the mother -- and is a member of Feminists for Life, an organization dedicated to discouraging women from abortion as an alternative. So she may be a woman, but she sure doesnt represent the views or the interests of a majority of women, who vote their own interest (Democrat) more than they vote for their own gender.
August 30, 2008 12:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Full disclosure here: I have been inspired by Obama, and am an one of his most avid supporters.
By the same token, I have been a passionate supporter of Bill Clinton since 1991, even during his darkest days (while still being VERY disappointed with him over his repeated unfaithfulness to his wife). And I've been an avid supporter of Hillary's run for Senator of NY, and have been excited to have watched her all these years, including not making a grand entrance to the most exclusive political club in the world, but instead growing in her role as a Senator, and winning the respect of most of her fellow Senators. And of all those who ran for the Democratic Presidential ticket this year, I felt that we ended up with the two best choices. I felt all along, and still do, that Hillary would make a great president.
I parted company with her primarily because she never admitted that her vote for giving Bush the leeway to wage this most stupid war in Iraq was wrong. And also because she accepted the editorial endorsement from The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, owned and published by Richard Mellon Scaife, the very instrument of the devil who made Bill Clinton and Hillary's life a living hell, from Whitewatergate to the right-winger’s attempt to find anything and everything to undo what they could not achieve by the ballot, namely to remove a twice elected Democrat from our country’s Presidency (which they seem to think is their private domain).
OK, enough disclosures. I fully concur with your reminder of how often men dump their wives for a younger trophy wife, or if they don't go that far, at least dally by trying to have a secret affair, ala John Edwards. I don't understand why the national media is giving such an easy pass to McCain's past, including dumping his first wife to marry a trophy wife, and I fear they'll give him just as much of a pass with this "political" trophy wife.
I can't imagine any Hillary supporter falling for this desperate hail mary play on McMain's part. But some might. Hey, enough Americans twice voted for Bush as president!!! What does that say about the level of intelligence in this country?
OK, the first one doesn't count, since not all votes were counted, only the ones that counted, namely, the Suprime Court votes. But the country DID vote for him the second go around, fully knowing how small his brain is. And I would not put it past Americans doing it again with another guy born with a silver spoon in his mouth, another low-achiever (graduating from Annapolis at the bottom of his class), another hot-shot gun-slicker (the myriad of times McCain crashed and burned as an aviator).
Sorry, I digress. Which I do often. Just ask my gorgeous wife.
I don't know how much longer women will put up with the stupid and callous ways in which their dumb husbands mistreat them. And I sure hope this country, which I love, won't fall for McCain's desperate campaign. But then, has anyone notice how different his campaign has been ever since one of Rove's disciples took over his campaign? I think Obama has it in the bag, but I don't have much faith in the American people not to do another dumb move.
Marcus
August 30, 2008 1:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, boy, here we go again.
Look, can we kindly drop the term "trophy wife"? Or "trophy VP?" Why? Because it makes TPM sound like it's populated by FNC talking heads -- only shilling for the Dems. It's not intelligent discussion -- and it's as sexist as anything else I've heard in this campaign that others whined about on these boards. At least let's have some consistency!
Let's be clear:
Palin won a beauty contest and won a scholarship to college as a result. If a Dem candidate did that, it would be praised as pulling yourself up by your bootstraps.
Palin is the Governor of a US State. She was an outside that got legitimately elected to the position without the help of a famous husband. (Yes, I'm being provocative to make a point.) She is a legitimate politician in the United States and does have executive office.
For those that will say Palin attained the Governorship via unusual circumstances, I would reply with "yes, but that's how Obama got his Senate seat as well."
Can we try to call out Palin on the substantive things? It's not like we are hurting for things to talk about!
Like:
a) she is a creationist
b) she has unknown (or no) views on foreign policy
c) she is hard-core anti-choice
rather than comment on her looks as a reason to consider her a light-weight or not? Can we please stay away from the "Alaska is insignificant" comments because (a) so is Arkansas and (b) it plays the elitist card?
Can me make the discussion here the type that Obama would be proud of?
August 30, 2008 4:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
b) she has unknown (or no) views on foreign policy
c) she is hard-core anti-choice.
Yes, lets get off this comparison with Lewinsky. Monica Lewinsky has done a lot of work on herself to overcome her youthful indiscretion. Why must she be belittled continuously? She should not continue to remain an archetype. She has moved on. Why cannot we? This is not about Lewinsky. This is about us stuck on an archetype and refusing to see how dangerous Palin is and to which dangerous crowd she appeals to.
August 30, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
McHomes is a very clever POW. Any critism on Palin will be met with cries of sexism from his campaign.
He has already has his top vacationers(McCain's beaches are great for a nose tan)Bob Schieffer and Kouric telling us what a bold move this is from the imaginary 'fighter pilot' (Homes was a bomber pilot)
and feeding us first stories of Palin 'putting down the blackberry for the breast pump'. Is anyone going to call him out for not putting his country first? This choice is complete madness.
August 30, 2008 7:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
No. Please don't call him out. Say nothing. It will be seen as the irresponsible choice it is provided the democrats just keep their heads down and let the voters reach that conclusion for themselves. Hillary and Obama each said the right thing "welcome to the race." Now it's time for a little silence.
August 30, 2008 7:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Politically, Palin seems young but physically, she really looks about 10 + years older, may be even passing for early 60s.
Hillary Clinton is what, 60 or 61 but looks more like early 50s or middle 40s....at least when she started running for president 18 months ago.
August 30, 2008 9:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
If I was standing behind her I know I'd be looking at her ass.......
August 30, 2008 10:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
If I was standing behind her I know I'd be looking at her ass.......
August 30, 2008 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
The plan is working.
Hours after a powerful acceptance speech by Obama, the blogosphere is trapped underneath Bill Clinton's desk and it is the nineties all over again.
August 30, 2008 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's the deal: If she were a dude, she'd be seen as this decade's inexperienced, rightwing Dan Quayle. So I'll refer to her as him from now on in this post.
He is going to seem very weak in the debates, much weaker than Biden, and though he won't be debating him, much weaker than Obama. Maybe he won't have that deer-in-the-headlights look that Qualye had, we'll see. He certainly looks more handsome than Qualye did -- who knows who that's going to sway.
One of the reasons John Sidney McCain the III picked him is because of his demand that women be unable to terminate a pregnancy even in the case of rape or incest. Also, he's a firm follower of the NRA, places pipelines above polar bears, thinks global warming isn't man-made, wants creationism in the schools -- is an all-around Republican base pleaser.
I would assume that anyone who wanted Clinton, who is the ideological opposite of this Alaskan dude, would now be even less likely to vote McCain. I would assume that's a reasonable assumption.
But he's got a vagina, and so do lots (but not all) of Clinton supporters. So this is to complicate things, I suppose?
August 30, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great comparison!
August 30, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks. I dunno about this Monica analogy. Or insinuations that McCain picked her because she's attractive looks-wise.
Last night I was with a group of friends in Louie's Trophy Room, a bar/restaurant that has lots of taxidermy. I don't mind stuffed deer, moose, etc. But they have dead mountain lions, wolves and -- this never fails to piss off me and my friends -- a stuffed polar bear (why were we there? Long story.).
Anyway, the usual clientel were overheard saying "I'll vote for her!" because she was on the TV waving a gun around.
These are the voters John Sidney McCain the III was hoping to motivate with this pick.
August 30, 2008 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's the crowd she appeals to - the gun-toting bible lovers.
The "praise the lord and pass the ammo" crowd. We need to stop belittling her and take her on her philosophy. This pick shows that McCain is making a clear bid to tighten grip on his rightwing base. Fucking scary.
August 30, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment