Palin: Good or Bad Choice

[Alcon]

Help, but not significantly.  VP picks this year seem to be theme-builders, not really blockbusters.

[Alcon]

She makes things different. The experience argument is dead, the military argument is dead, the celebrity argument is dead. The feminism debate is alive. And that's pretty much it. I would have been happier with McCain choosing Pawlenty simply because it would mean a continuation of the same campaign (on both sides), which I think Obama would have won now that the DNC has happened. (Other choices such as Romney would have just made things worse for McCain.) On the other hand, I don't think Palin makes it more likely that McCain wins; what she does do is make the election harder to figure out, at least in the short term. We may know the paradigm a week from now.

I'm not sure the experience argument is dead.  The Rove playbook is not big on addressing cognitive dissidence.

[Alcon]

She makes things different. The experience argument is dead, the military argument is dead, the celebrity argument is dead. The feminism debate is alive. And that's pretty much it. I would have been happier with McCain choosing Pawlenty simply because it would mean a continuation of the same campaign (on both sides), which I think Obama would have won now that the DNC has happened. (Other choices such as Romney would have just made things worse for McCain.) On the other hand, I don't think Palin makes it more likely that McCain wins; what she does do is make the election harder to figure out, at least in the short term. We may know the paradigm a week from now.

I'm not sure the experience argument is dead.  The Rove playbook is not big on addressing cognitive dissidence.

McCain can still use it, but Obama now has the easiest ammunition of all to rebut it: Palin is an enormous lightweight (lol, oxymoronic metaphor). I don't think we'll see much of it.

This may explain the tone transition from "inexperienced" to "not ready to lead," though -- which I think is clever.  This might explain why McCain's campaign has almost seemed to stop using references to experience recently.  Maybe I'm reading too much into that.

[Alcon]

To the extent that "the base" (I hate that term) just loves her and endears them to McCain, then it helps.

I doubt 10% of the base has heard of her.  If you're talking about the real GOP base that they need to get out, the fundies, they'll probably like her on paper but a little less in practice.  Just my gut.

[Alcon]

I've heard she's somewhat moderate (for a Republican) on gay rights.

She "has gay friends" and followed a court order to offer state partner benefits, which entailed a veto of unconstitutional anti-gay rights legislation.  She also supports civil unions.  I guess that makes her moderate for a Republican.  She isn't a fire-breather, but she is (unfortunately) a religious conservative, and seems perfectly happy with the status quo.  Other than her inexperience, that is my biggest (and probably sole) criticism.

[Alcon]

And to Alcon: Yes they have. That's why they're "The Base" (ugh).

This may be a point of disagreement, but I don't think McCain has ever risked losing the hyper-educated base.  Moreover, I don't think that's a major part of the swing electorate.  I think the low-information fundamentalist vote is vastly more important and worth pandering to.  They don't know who Sarah Palin is.  They'll like her positions, though.

I usually think of "the base" as a support system.  I guess you could consider that to be the high-information, activist GOP voters, but I think of that more as the "grassroots."  "The base" I usually think of more as the common, relatively reliable conservative voters.  Semantics

[Alcon]

Help, but not significantly.  VP picks this year seem to be theme-builders, not really blockbusters.

Haha, fail, me.

To be fair, this was the totally reasonable position considering what I knew at the time.