sombrefan: (Depressed)
[personal profile] sombrefan
But I have to admit the hysteria that greeted the announcement of Palin as the Republican nominee for vice-president has left me cold. I'm used to the right-wing attacks on Democrats but the sheer vitriol thrown at the Alaskan governor is pretty damn nauseating. Is it because she is a woman or that the left did not see this one coming? Or both? Aren't we supposed to the good guys?

Date: 2008-09-01 09:51 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] carduustristus.livejournal.com
I think that Dems hoped that if a woman was nominated for the VP ticket, it would be a woman like Hillary--experienced, mature, tested. SP is SO not that woman.

Did you hear the news that SP's 17 year old daughter is pregnant out of wedlock? Doesn't look good for a politician that is known for her extremely conservative views and her refusal to allow sex education (other than abstinence only) in the high schools of Alaska.

Hmm...

Date: 2008-09-02 05:18 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jpatricklemarr.livejournal.com
I'm confused about what experience HC has other than riding her husband's coattails. She hasn't been in the game HERSELF long enough to be tested, and it still irks me that she moved to NY to run.

As for SP, I know nothing at all about her one way or the other. I would have liked for McCain to have picked Lieberman. I would have voted that ticket. As I don't care for Biden's politics or Obama's... Obama-ness, I'm left with McCain, who isn't, in my opinion, conservative enough, but he is the least offensive choice for me.

I wish both parties would strive for some balance. I think McCain/Lieberman, while dual party, would have given the US government some balance and bridged some gaps. I'm just tired of all the Dems saying hateful crap about Republicans and Republicans saying hateful crap about Dems. Let's find the things we CAN agree on and try to better this country.

J

Date: 2008-09-01 11:18 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] crossoverman.livejournal.com
It's because she's inexperienced. It's because she's a pawn. It's because she's the anti-Hillary. There's nothing good about the pick. The fact we didn't see it coming has compounded the problem.

Date: 2008-09-02 04:14 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kuzibah.livejournal.com
Well, there are a lot of conservatives that are not evangelicals (*waves*) who were hoping that a McCain candidacy would end the recent equating of conservativism with far-right-wing religiousity. Picking a far-right-wing evangelical pretty much dashed that dream.

Yeah.

Date: 2008-09-05 01:41 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] thespice.livejournal.com
My mind is kinda boggling over the whole thing.

Date: 2008-09-03 01:36 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] electrcspacegrl.livejournal.com
This entry on FiveThirtyEight.com explains it all:

8:33 PM [Nate] Since we haven't talked about Sarah Palin in six minutes or so... One point of chatter among the conservative commentariat has been "Why are liberals freaking out so much about Sarah Palin?". I think there are two reasons. One, liberals smell blood in the water. But two, she reminds them of George W. Bush. There is not the same frat boy entitlement, thank goodness. But with McCain -- whatever else you say about him -- there was a certain seriousness of purpose, a certain respect for the Office of the Presidency that was hard not to admire. His campaign wasn't dumbed down. With the Palin pick, he seems -- to liberal eyes -- to have undermined those things. It's the old 50+1, smallball, base-rallying gambit, a pick less maverick than cavalier.

Profile

sombrefan: (Default)
sombrefan

August 2011

S M T W T F S
  1 2 3 4 5 6
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031   

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Mar. 22nd, 2026 12:42 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios