Looks like McCain has picked his VP...

axer

Affable wrote: »

I'm no expert, but couldn't he have taken the centre ground more with Liebermen?

Thats what I thought too but McCain is, I believe, already shaky for many republicans thus they needed to solidify that base with a pro-life, NRA gun toutin' republican. Apparently not many republicans are being energised so far and if they don't show up to vote then it is definitely game over for McCain.

GuanYin

Pocono Joe wrote: »

One last shot (you all have worn me out). How about a governor who oversees 24,000 state employees, 14 statewide Cabinet agencies, and a $10 billion budget.

It is worth noting that although the state has that budget, the Alaskan economy is vastly different to other states. For starters, Big Oil accounts for 80% of the annual budget. Secondly, the state has no sales or income tax on individuals (again corporate tax). The variability in the oil industry is dealt with by a side fund from Big Oil (who also supplement year-round residents).

This is probably alot more straight forward than other states and Palin has really only managed one budget so far to it's completion.

I really, really, really want Palin to be that strong, glass-ceiling breaking woman candidate, but there is no stretch of imagination by any rational uncommitted voter that can see Palin being even adequate for this job.

Manic Moran

My pay checque for the last half-year has been from the State of Nevada. Income tax... 0%.

I bought a rifle last month from a manufacturer in Oregon. Sales tax... 0%.

I'm not sure if there is a 'typical' State in the Union. As long as the money going out doesn't exceed the money going in, and the economy continues to do well enough, does it really matter exactly where the money in any particular State, with its own laws and resources to draw from, comes from?

Seriously, she ran Alaska, it has a population of less than a million, it's barely a state.

At 20% of the country, the State has its own interesting budget problems to solve. A hell of a lot of infrastructure with few people to carry it out. I would also point out that a population of about that size is over a quarter of the entire population of Ireland. Hardly insignificant. It's also to be said that people in Flyover Country are taking note of the flak that the Democratic party are sending over 'insignificant small States.' Sure individually they don't hold many EC votes, but as a group, they're a pretty powerful number. If the Democrat leadership doesn't respect the small States as entities, what chance that they will take the small States into due account during the Presidency?

So a president has to have executive experience to be qualified? How many presidents (or even presidential candidates) have moved into the position from governor?

It's probably akin to going from being a senior designer in an electronics firm to CEO. You have a good idea what you're on about, but are skipping out on some of the mid-manager positions. Of the presidents in the last 32 years, 4 of them were governors.

I'm no expert, but couldn't he have taken the centre ground more with Lieberman?

A good question, which is why he was always one of the hot-runners for the position. Lieberman would not have been a bad choice at all, I don't think, but I'm sure the Campaign crunched the numbers.

Hold on, none of the other three have executive experience - McCain himself said she has more executive experience than he has.

Excluding the time spent in a POW camp, and his early couple of years in flight training, the military counts. Some of it, such as when he's a lieutenant charge of little but a maintenance crew and a few auxilliary duties, doesn't count for much. Some of it, such as being in charge of a training unit, unquestionably counts. I'm still looking for the exact McCain quote, if it was something like "More elected executive experience", it would be accurate.

NTM

KJ_2008

Sand wrote: »

Obama has snorted cocaine ffs.

Link? (No, not one from Ann Coulter or Fox News )

An interesting comment, though, from a Palin devotee who objects to "muck-raking".

Victor

latenia wrote: »

Yeah. Imagine if a Republican candidate started making personal comments about the teenage offspring of an opponent. Oh wait...

"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?
Because her father is Janet Reno."

John McCain June 1998

I'd hit it. :pac:

Manic Moran

You have found the one picture of her in which she looks good.

NTM

LolaLuv

I went to see Chelsea speak and she is quite the hot tamale. Nice legs, tight ass, cute face. She was surprisingly pretty.

Manic Moran

KJ_2008 wrote: »

Link? (No, not one from Ann Coulter or Fox News )

Source is Obama, in his book "Dreams from my Father"

NTM

Victor

http://www.google.ie/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4ADBF_enIE290IE291&q=chelsea+clinton+hot

Manic Moran wrote: »

As long as the money going out doesn't exceed the money going in, and the economy continues to do well enough, does it really matter exactly where the money in any particular State, with its own laws and resources to draw from, comes from?

A side issue, but having all your eggs in one basket generally isn't good.

Manic Moran

Hobbes wrote: »

She also was mayor of a town that had 0 debt when she started and 22 million debt and taxes raised when she left.

Going back to this one...

I'm just one household, and am currently some $500,000 in debt. I wasn't a couple of years ago. However, I am not bankrupt either.

Fortunately, the city of Wasalia has its financial documents publicly available.

http://www.cityofwasilla.com/index.aspx?page=136

Go to 'Recently Requested' and you can see the financial reports for the appropriate years.

You're presumably looking specifically at the two bond issues, one of some $5m for roads, and one of $15m for the sports stadium, which I should note was voted upon by the electorate directly. (Bond issues in the US are usually done by referendum). You will note that outside of the voter-approved bond issue, the City spent $2m less than it received in taxes: In other words, it ran a profit.

Of the bond issues, the sports stadium resulted in a real asset, thus raising the City's balance sheet for net worth. Plus, of course, some of the costs would eventually be recouped over the structure's life. The roads, not so much. But since the roads needed work now, and $5m of roadwork is a bit much for a city with a budget surplus of only $2m, I think it's probably not fair to say that it was a bad move.

The city's overall asset/debt ratio right now is pretty good, better than most cities. When Palin left office in 2002, the city's total assets were $91.5m, and total liabilities of $26.8m. A difference of $64.7m

By way of comparison, the figures for 1995, the year before she took office, were a budget surplus of $800k, assets of $41m, and liabilties of $4.2m, a difference of $36m. So basically in her six years, she doubled the city's profit, and doubled the city's net worth. That's not too bad, I don't think.

NTM

Hobbes

Thanks for the link MM! Will read through it later.

Incidently this is where I got my details from.
http://www.crosscut.com/politics-government/17341

GuanYin

Manic Moran wrote: »

My pay checque for the last half-year has been from the State of Nevada. Income tax... 0%.

I bought a rifle last month from a manufacturer in Oregon. Sales tax... 0%.

I'm not sure if there is a 'typical' State in the Union. As long as the money going out doesn't exceed the money going in, and the economy continues to do well enough, does it really matter exactly where the money in any particular State, with its own laws and resources to draw from, comes from?

Alaska, Delaware, Montana, New Hampshire and Oregon are the atypical states without sales tax. Hawaii sales tax is charged to businesses who carry it on in pricing for consumers. So yes, there is a typical system and Alaska is atypical. Add to that the fact that so much of the money comes from once source and the cynic (and there are many, I lived briefly in Alaska) might suggest that Gov of Alaska is merely a corporate represetitive position with Big Oil.


Regarding Income Tax, the states of Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming charge no personal income tax but source their taxes elsewhere. Usually a state corporate tax, which in Alaska's case comes from.... you guessed it, mostly Big Oil.

My point is, many are making light of the executive mandate in Alaska and while it isn't something anyone could pick up over a weekend, it is not even close to being comparable to running a state like New York, California, Mass or even Colorado, never mind the VP position.

Victor

Oh, so the one with executive experience is going to run the legislature and the one with legislative experience is going to run the executive. Do I have that right?

Hobbes

Turns out McCain had criticized Palin for objectionable spending at least 3 times before picking her.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/la-na-earmarks3-2008sep03,0,5932587.story?track=rss

cooker3

Her speech was pretty good this morning. Flicking through the networks, generally all pretty positive. Interesting to see how she handles going on the campaign trail and the VP debate with Biden.

On a point of choosing Lieberman for VP, I think McCain would have liked to choose him cause they by all accounts are very good friends but the christian right especially would have gone mad over it and McCain is on pretty shaky ground with them as it is. They will love Palin though.

Belfast

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Still don’t know much about the surprise pick of Palin… will have to get educated over the weekend.
BUT AT FIRST GLANCE… LOOKS LIKE A WINNER TO ME!

maybe Mccain is a fan of Battlestar galactica



Or commander in chief

Sand

Palin, 44, contrasted her experience as a self-described “small-town mayor” with that of the Democratic presidential nominee, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois.

“Since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involves,” Palin said. “I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a ‘community organizer,’ except that you have actual responsibilities.”

Palin did not mention Obama by name, but her target was obvious: Obama began his political life as a community organizer.

:pac:

she dismissed critics of her background as snobs who looked down on ordinary Americans and their concerns.

“I’m not a member of the permanent political establishment,” Palin said. “And I’ve learned quickly these past few days that if you’re not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone.

“But here’s a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators: I’m not going to Washington to seek their good opinion,” she said. “I’m going to Washington to serve the people of this country.”

These speeches must just write themselves with the ammunition the Democrats have been passing Palin.

Hobbes

then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone.

lol blame the media, sidestep what is being reported. That is ammunition?

Sand

Paradoxically, a popular political play in US politics seems to be to run "against Washington", or to "take Washington back" from corrupt insiders etc etc for ordinary Americans struggling with taxes and so on.

When Obama and Co demean Alaska, they demean all other small states in the US. With Obama already on record as describing middle America as bitter, and struggling to shake an elitist image and connect with people without a degree he really, really, really doesnt need to help Palin anymore with convincing middle america that she and McCain will represent them more than Obama will.

Thats why laughing at Palins small town, her state and sneering at her degree is...well, frankly stupid. The Dems have been hitting her on these points trying to score points and she just flipped it round and used their attacks against them. Easy, obvious ploy and its weird the Democrats never considered it.

If they had simply acknowledged Palin as an interesting choice, hit her on her creationism views, and then waited for her apparent inexperience and failings to reveal themselves on campaign then they would do much better than what theyve done so far.

is_that_so

A fairly rousing speech to the troops even though the crowd reactions were cringeworthy. In my view she did a very good job of introducing herself and came across as a tough cookie and ready to go. They got all the PTA, family struggles and everything else you'd expect. And there was all the usual party base stuff, terrorism , energy, taxes etc. There were also accomplishments, which will be knocked of course, but at least she can say "as governor of our state".

She also got a few nice digs in against Obama and may be better suited to having a go at him than McCain on the trail. She's also likely to go down well in small towns. And the surprise McCain moment worked well. All in all there's a good battle ahead and it will be interesting to see how Americans and women in particular, respond, now that they have had a look at her.

axer

Hobbes wrote: »

lol blame the media, sidestep what is being reported. That is ammunition?

and make up stuff.

She has a very annoying voice. This is the makings of a sunday afternoon movie.

Hobbes

axer wrote: »

and make up stuff.

What stuff did they make up? Because I see there is already a list of made up stuff on the speeches.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/04/ap-attacks-praise-stretch_n_123771.html

Paradoxically, a popular political play in US politics seems to be to run "against Washington", or to "take Washington back" from corrupt insiders etc etc for ordinary Americans struggling with taxes and so on.

Which Repubs are playing. which is funny because Democrats only held house/senate since Jan 2007 and Bush vetoes/signing statement anything he doesn't like.

irish_bob

cooker3 wrote: »

Her speech was pretty good this morning. Flicking through the networks, generally all pretty positive. Interesting to see how she handles going on the campaign trail and the VP debate with Biden.

On a point of choosing Lieberman for VP, I think McCain would have liked to choose him cause they by all accounts are very good friends but the christian right especially would have gone mad over it and McCain is on pretty shaky ground with them as it is. They will love Palin though.

the christian right like liberman as he is a staunch zionists , remember the christian right are devoted to israel as they believe those who are on the side of israel when the rapture happens will be saved

axer

Hobbes wrote: »

What stuff did they make up? Because I see there is already a list of made up stuff on the speeches.

That there is lots of oil and gas in america as if that would be even close to enough.

That Barack Obama is against producing more energy.

That Barack Obama wants to forfeit the war in Iraq.

Just some off the top of my head.

BenjAii

I hope (and think) Obama will be smart enough to stick to the issues, with his own version of "It's the economy, stupid".

It's paradoxical that the Republicans do worst by far for ordinary working people, yet such people can be convinced that its the Republicans who their interests at heart, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary; because despite how much worse off they will make them, they play to their religious views, or a sense of patriotism.

Targets for Republican disastrous incompetence and corruption should be like shooting fish in a barrel, I assume Obama is smart enough to see that is where the battle lines really need to be drawn.

Sand wrote: »

Thats why laughing at Palins small town, her state and sneering at her degree is...well, frankly stupid. The Dems have been hitting her on these points trying to score points and she just flipped it round and used their attacks against them. Easy, obvious ploy and its weird the Democrats never considered it.

If they had simply acknowledged Palin as an interesting choice, hit her on her creationism views, and then waited for her apparent inexperience and failings to reveal themselves on campaign then they would do much better than what theyve done so far.

axer

I have to laugh at all this talk of sexism but yet palin pushes herself (and others in their camp do too) as the "hockey mom" as if that is enough of a reason to vote for her.

Or that some in her camp say she will be great for american women to have in the whitehouse because she understands what it is like to juggle a career and a family but yet shout "sexism" if someone else questions if she will have time for her family (I don't know who did question her time for her family but Rudy Giuliani seems to think someone or some people did).

Then their own audience had buttons with "Hottest VP from the coolest state" - that is sexism. Their own party are the ones being sexiest but yet they try to blame the media?

They should stop playing this "Im a woman - women should vote for me" or else suffer the consequences - you can't have it both ways. It should be about the issues and the beliefs/opinions/ideas of the candidates - not their gender.

snow scorpion

I thought the best line of the speech was this:

Al Qaeda terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America ... [Obama is] worried that someone won't read them their rights.

That was like a Mike Tyson hook to the kidney.

Lirange

That was more like Tyson attempting to gnaw off an ear.

Hobbes

snow scorpion wrote: »

That was like a Mike Tyson hook to the kidney.

Ever hear of innocent until proven guilty?

Sesshoumaru

snow scorpion wrote: »

I thought the best line of the speech was this:



That was like a Mike Tyson hook to the kidney.

Obama thinks all that the terrorists need is a big group hug!