Anyone think Palin will withdraw from the McCain ticket?

13»

Comments

  • digster
    digster Posts: 1,293
    PEPPER wrote:
    No I am pretty sure it was more then the republican talking heads....the polls did not move after his Mile High Speech…you don’t think that would have swayed a few voters???

    That's why it was very smart of McCain to release his VP pick the next morning. Instead of that evening's news being about the speech and the ramifications of it, the VP pick was top story.

    Anyway, convention boosts of 15+ points are a thing of the past, particularly in the last few elections. The news moves too quickly now.
  • keithcandyl
    keithcandyl Posts: 82
    mammasan wrote:
    I agree with the Evangilicals that it shouldn't be an issue, but I also can't stand their blatant hypocracy. Had this happened to a Democratic candidate the James Dobson's of the world would have cursed the candidate and his/her heathen daughter straight to hell.

    I totally agree. Total f'ing hypocrites!!!! If one day of Obama's daughters turns up pregnant in the white house we won't hear the end of it from Dobson or Land or Robertson. Or worse yet if one of them turns up lesbian daughter. That's just what you'd expect from a heathen party.

    But I can bet you anything that some stupid preacher somewhere or some stupid professor of divinity from Lee University is going to come out and make a real ass of himself. Remember that the majority of Christian private schools will make a girl leave school if she turns up pregnant. Real compassionate way to support a girl in her deepest time of need!

    Palin's going to stand by her daughter and McCain is going to stand by Palin so at least those couple of people are going right.
    And if there's something you'd like to do. Oh, just let me continue to blame you.

    EV Chi 1, 08/21/08
    EV Memphis, 06/20/09
  • digster
    digster Posts: 1,293
    PEPPER wrote:
    I can only imagine what would have been said and how much hoopla would have been given if it moved a little rather then the response you just gave. You don't think they were thinking numbers when they pulled 80,000 people into the stadium

    Huh? I said before that the probable reason there was no bounce was that McCain announced the VP pick the next day. You think there's another reason they announced it the morning after? They wanted to steal Obama's fire.
  • Solat13
    Solat13 Posts: 6,996
    digster wrote:
    Huh? I said before that the probable reason there was no bounce was that McCain announced the VP pick the next day. You think there's another reason they announced it the morning after? They wanted to steal Obama's fire.

    Well, that's more the DNC's fault for the timing of McCain's pick. Traditionally it's made a few days before the party's convention and with the Dems scheduling their convention the week before the Republican convention, when else was McCain going to announce it?

    Usually the conventions are a few weeks apart.
    - Busted down the pretext
    - 8/28/98
    - 9/2/00
    - 4/28/03, 5/3/03, 7/3/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 7/9/03, 7/11/03, 7/12/03, 7/14/03
    - 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 10/1/04, 10/2/04
    - 9/11/05, 9/12/05, 9/13/05, 9/30/05, 10/1/05, 10/3/05
    - 5/12/06, 5/13/06, 5/27/06, 5/28/06, 5/30/06, 6/1/06, 6/3/06, 6/23/06, 7/22/06, 7/23/06, 12/2/06, 12/9/06
    - 8/2/07, 8/5/07
    - 6/19/08, 6/20/08, 6/22/08, 6/24/08, 6/25/08, 6/27/08, 6/28/08, 6/30/08, 7/1/08
    - 8/23/09, 8/24/09, 9/21/09, 9/22/09, 10/27/09, 10/28/09, 10/30/09, 10/31/09
    - 5/15/10, 5/17/10, 5/18/10, 5/20/10, 5/21/10, 10/23/10, 10/24/10
    - 9/11/11, 9/12/11
    - 10/18/13, 10/21/13, 10/22/13, 11/30/13, 12/4/13
  • digster
    digster Posts: 1,293
    Solat13 wrote:
    Well, that's more the DNC's fault for the timing of McCain's pick. Traditionally it's made a few days before the party's convention and with the Dems scheduling their convention the week before the Republican convention, when else was McCain going to announce it?

    Usually the conventions are a few weeks apart.

    OK, either way you're telling me that he didn't purposefully set the VP announcement to dilute Obama's speech? It wouldn't matter if the conventions were a week apart or a year apart. I wasn't even saying it was wrong, it was a smart political move. But I think you're crazy if you say that was not the main reason for releasing the pick the very next morning.
  • Zanne
    Zanne Posts: 899
    digster wrote:
    OK, either way you're telling me that he didn't purposefully set the VP announcement to dilute Obama's speech? It wouldn't matter if the conventions were a week apart or a year apart. I wasn't even saying it was wrong, it was a smart political move. But I think you're crazy if you say that was not the main reason for releasing the pick the very next morning.


    It kept Obama's people from having a dig at Palin during the DNC.. which would have been huge because of the coverage/viewers. It would have been a free for all considering no one would have to pay extra for airtime.

    That said,

    Obama '08!

    Peace
    Just me
  • callen
    callen Posts: 6,388
    I'm just wondering if Sarah whipped out the single or double barrel to get the daddy to propose
    10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
  • Solat13
    Solat13 Posts: 6,996
    digster wrote:
    OK, either way you're telling me that he didn't purposefully set the VP announcement to dilute Obama's speech? It wouldn't matter if the conventions were a week apart or a year apart. I wasn't even saying it was wrong, it was a smart political move. But I think you're crazy if you say that was not the main reason for releasing the pick the very next morning.

    So when was he going to announce his VP? You always wait as long as possible to announce your VP. Was he just going to announce it the day of the convention?
    - Busted down the pretext
    - 8/28/98
    - 9/2/00
    - 4/28/03, 5/3/03, 7/3/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 7/9/03, 7/11/03, 7/12/03, 7/14/03
    - 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 10/1/04, 10/2/04
    - 9/11/05, 9/12/05, 9/13/05, 9/30/05, 10/1/05, 10/3/05
    - 5/12/06, 5/13/06, 5/27/06, 5/28/06, 5/30/06, 6/1/06, 6/3/06, 6/23/06, 7/22/06, 7/23/06, 12/2/06, 12/9/06
    - 8/2/07, 8/5/07
    - 6/19/08, 6/20/08, 6/22/08, 6/24/08, 6/25/08, 6/27/08, 6/28/08, 6/30/08, 7/1/08
    - 8/23/09, 8/24/09, 9/21/09, 9/22/09, 10/27/09, 10/28/09, 10/30/09, 10/31/09
    - 5/15/10, 5/17/10, 5/18/10, 5/20/10, 5/21/10, 10/23/10, 10/24/10
    - 9/11/11, 9/12/11
    - 10/18/13, 10/21/13, 10/22/13, 11/30/13, 12/4/13
  • digster
    digster Posts: 1,293
    Solat13 wrote:
    So when was he going to announce his VP? You always wait as long as possible to announce your VP. Was he just going to announce it the day of the convention?

    OK, this argument's going nowhere. If you're honestly telling me that you do not think one of the primary reasons McCain released his VP pick the morning (not two days, not later that day, the morning) after Obama's speech was to dilute the aforementioned 'bounce' from that speech, then I just don't know what to tell you. I don't even know why we're arguing; it's good politics.
  • callen
    callen Posts: 6,388
    digster wrote:
    OK, this argument's going nowhere. If you're honestly telling me that you do not think one of the primary reasons McCain released his VP pick the morning (not two days, not later that day, the morning) after Obama's speech was to dilute the aforementioned 'bounce' from that speech, then I just don't know what to tell you. I don't even know why we're arguing; it's good politics.
    For sure that was the plan...now for the bounce for Obama...that wasn't going to happen...most already knew of his speaking abilities and those that don't wouldn't have watched anyway. Just kept the news from spending slow news day on Dem convention. As you say, smart politics.
    10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
  • digster
    digster Posts: 1,293
    callen wrote:
    For sure that was the plan...now for the bounce for Obama...that wasn't going to happen...most already knew of his speaking abilities and those that don't wouldn't have watched anyway. Just kept the news from spending slow news day on Dem convention. As you say, smart politics.

    I don't know....40 million people (the amount of people that watched Obama's speech) seems to me to be a bit more than the die-hard party faithful, and it's far more than any other convention speech that I can remember. If the speech brought back many disillusioned Clinton followers to the fold (and this poll: http://www.gallup.com/poll/109957/Obama-Gains-Among-Former-Clinton-Supporters.aspx seems to suggest that it worked) than the speech was a massive success.
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    PEPPER wrote:
    No not all, just giving my reasons why Palin will not be let go or asked to leave the VP nominee position ...just making comparison between Obama and Palin...

    Also, another reason she will not leave was because of Palin Obama's polls did not jump...just one last one, the fact she has been nominated there has been little talk of Obama and i the long run...that is all that matters......

    And one last thing: http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/13068

    so much for putting country first....

    here's another thing: http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-09-01-poll-monday_N.htm
  • Solat13
    Solat13 Posts: 6,996
    digster wrote:
    OK, this argument's going nowhere. If you're honestly telling me that you do not think one of the primary reasons McCain released his VP pick the morning (not two days, not later that day, the morning) after Obama's speech was to dilute the aforementioned 'bounce' from that speech, then I just don't know what to tell you. I don't even know why we're arguing; it's good politics.

    In 2000, the Republican convention ended August 4th and the Monday afterwards August 8th, Gore announced Lieberman as his pick.

    The DNC was one week later.

    In this case, there was no break between the conventions.

    In 2004 and 1992, it wouldn't apply at the Republicans were running for re-election so their vps would be the same. In 1996, the Dems were running for relection so it wouldn't apply either.

    The is the first time since the 50's the conventions are back to back weeks.

    I'm at work right now and can't research that far back, but when exactly did you want McCain to announce his VP?
    - Busted down the pretext
    - 8/28/98
    - 9/2/00
    - 4/28/03, 5/3/03, 7/3/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 7/9/03, 7/11/03, 7/12/03, 7/14/03
    - 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 10/1/04, 10/2/04
    - 9/11/05, 9/12/05, 9/13/05, 9/30/05, 10/1/05, 10/3/05
    - 5/12/06, 5/13/06, 5/27/06, 5/28/06, 5/30/06, 6/1/06, 6/3/06, 6/23/06, 7/22/06, 7/23/06, 12/2/06, 12/9/06
    - 8/2/07, 8/5/07
    - 6/19/08, 6/20/08, 6/22/08, 6/24/08, 6/25/08, 6/27/08, 6/28/08, 6/30/08, 7/1/08
    - 8/23/09, 8/24/09, 9/21/09, 9/22/09, 10/27/09, 10/28/09, 10/30/09, 10/31/09
    - 5/15/10, 5/17/10, 5/18/10, 5/20/10, 5/21/10, 10/23/10, 10/24/10
    - 9/11/11, 9/12/11
    - 10/18/13, 10/21/13, 10/22/13, 11/30/13, 12/4/13
  • digster
    digster Posts: 1,293
    Solat13 wrote:
    I'm at work right now and can't research that far back, but when exactly did you want McCain to announce his VP?

    I am hearing everything you're saying, considering the short length of time between conventions. I'm saying if you think that they knew they needed to get the word out about the VP position, and then they just happened to announce it the very morning after Obama's speech, during the time of the morning when most people would be watching and there'd be commentary regarding the speech, if you think that's just a coincidence, then all I can say is that I think you're wrong. To prove you wrong, I'd have to be an insider on the McCain campaign, but I think it's pretty obvious that they announced in that matter, at that time and in that way to dilute Obama's bump.
  • Strangest Tribe
    Strangest Tribe Posts: 2,502
    She won't withdraw that'd surely kill their shot at winning the election.

    But if I was that actor that plays Osama Bin Laudin on TV I'd be scared shitless if they called on me to make another appearance before the election.
    the Minions
  • g under p
    g under p Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,237
    SuzannePjam wrote:
    Curious to know your source about the bounce you claim McCain recieved in the polls. I see Palin created a lot buzz in the media, but I don't think they brought his poll numbers up.

    Latest Gallup Poll shows no 'Palin bump' for McCain
    Yael T. Abouhalkah, Kansas City Star Editorial Page columnist

    The Gallup Poll's daily tracking service never sleeps: The Labor Day poll shows Barack Obama leads John McCain 49-43 percent. The bottom line: No big bump (yet) for McCain's pick of Sarah Palin as his vice presidential nominee.

    Obama led McCain by the same 6 percentage points right after the end of the Democratic National Convention -- and a day before Palin became national news.

    Obviously, the daily tracking poll in the next day or two will reflect what Americans think about Palin now that they know her 17-year-old unmarried daughter is about five months pregnant.

    I was nor referring to polls, I don't vote on polls. What I was referring to was the lack of money flowing into his money, with his choice of Palin and her stances on abortion, guns etc he received a bump in the Christian Right. The CR were not on board with their vast funds until he chose Palin. Now he has that bump in funds which needed to keep this campaign going strong.

    Peace
    *We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti

    *MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
    .....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti

    *The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)


  • slightofjeff
    slightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    Why would she withdraw?

    The situation with her daughter HELPS the McCain/Palin ticket, imo. At worst, it doesn't hurt.

    There's no reason for her to withdraw. They came out and admitted what was going on, and that's that.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • SuzannePjam
    SuzannePjam Posts: 411
    g under p wrote:
    I was nor referring to polls, I don't vote on polls. What I was referring to was the lack of money flowing into his money, with his choice of Palin and her stances on abortion, guns etc he received a bump in the Christian Right. The CR were not on board with their vast funds until he chose Palin. Now he has that bump in funds which needed to keep this campaign going strong.

    Peace

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by g under p
    No she won't withdraw and they did get the bounce they wanted.

    Oh, in your original post you didn't mention "cash", so I thought you meant poll numbers. :)
    "Where there is sacrifice there is someone collecting the sacrificial offerings."-- Ayn Rand

    "Some of my friends sit around every evening and they worry about the times ahead,
    But everybody else is overwhelmed by indifference and the promise of an early bed..."-- Elvis Costello
  • g under p
    g under p Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,237
    SuzannePjam wrote:
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by g under p
    No she won't withdraw and they did get the bounce they wanted.

    Oh, in your original post you didn't mention "cash", so I thought you meant poll numbers. :)

    I didn't have to mention *cash* I said, vast monetary funds. :)

    Peace
    *We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti

    *MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
    .....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti

    *The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)


Categories