THE PALIN BOUNCE...
Saturday, September 6, 2008 at 09:34AM 
Well, ATW reader Peter predicted this and he has been proven right by the latest poll which show that John McCain headed into the last 60 days of the US presidential campaign neck
and neck with Barack Obama after a “Sarah Palin bounce” appeared to have all
but cancelled out the Democrat’s lead in the polls.Good lord, so trailer trash from Nebraska can outshine the Chosen One, surely not??/
"With the Republican Party finishing its convention in St Paul believing that
victory on November 4 is truly within its grasp, the Rasmussen tracking poll
yesterday had Mr Obama on 46 per cent and Mr McCain on 45 per cent. Mr Obama headed to the battleground state of Pennsylvania last night knowing
that he has a titanic fight on his hands to realise his dream of becoming
America’s first black president. His aides have said for months that the
race for the White House will be close, but Republicans left their Minnesota
convention knowing that the contest is now really up for grabs.The Rasmussen poll, a three-day rolling average, was taken before Mr McCain
addressed his party — and many interviews were conducted even before Mrs
Palin’s barnstorming performance as “a pitbull with lipstick”, suggesting
that there may be further Republican gains in the next few days."
Is it any wonder that not a day passes without further disgusting smears being cast on Sarah Palin? The Democrats and their courtier media KNOW that the game in now really on and that the prospect of Sarah Palin outshining nuanced Obamessiah gets greater by the day. What they don't get is the more they smear her, the stronger she gets and the better the GOP prospects become.
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (48)
Voters react negatively to hate and the mask slipped from the face of the US left last week. Their attacks of Palin revealed much about themselves.
Of course if she had wilted under the attacks then she would have shown she couldn't take the heat. But she handled with such style that she proved herself well able for the job.
And she seems to have brought out the best in John McCain too.
The guy with the toughest job now is Joe Biden (remember him?) He has to debate against Palin. The Washington insider against a woman who put the Governor of Alaska's private jet on e-bay when she took office.
Could Obama ask Biden to step aside for Hillary or is it too late? He has brought nothing to the ticket.
McCain has shown yet again that he has better judgement by far. And leadership is about judgement above all else.
>>Well, ATW reader Peter predicted this and he has been proven right by the latest poll which show that John McCain<<
David, are you raving? Peter predicted that the McCann/Palin would have "a clear lead by the
weekend".
It was I who had the temerity to suggest that Obama would still be ahead in the polls!
And as usual I was right! Obama is still ahead in the RCP national average of polls and in every one of the five leading polls that make up that average, except CBS where there is a tie. McCann is ahead in none.
Just flexing your wishful thinking muscles in practice for wishing McCann/Palin into the White House, David?
Well, you’re really wishing on a falling star in this case!
Noel,
The polls don't reflect the full impact of the Palin speech nor the McCain speech. Peter is right and the wishful thinking lies amongst those who underrate a war veteran and a rising star from Alaska. The left always shows their true colours at these times - I await the wails of "racism" come November.
>>The polls don't reflect the full impact of the Palin speech ...<<
Well, before you said that the "Sarah Palin bounce" practically cancelling the Obama lead in the polls. But either way, that certainly doesn't dilute the nonsense in your opening sentence.
>>Peter is right and the wishful thinking..<<
So,
- Peter said that McCain/P would have a clear lead in the polls by the weekend
- The weekend has come and McCain/P is still behind in the polls.
- But Peter is still right because, well (sob) becasue I wish he was right,:(
I think we need to see the polls early next week when all the hoopla of the conventions have died down to get a clearer picture of the mood of the US people. I think it is definitely true that Sarah Palin has shook up the whole campaign and by and large positively , but even that is largely froth. However I still predict that McCain will win the presidency but by a small margin.
David,
"a pitbull with lipstick"
The phrase 'can't put lipstick on a chicken' would seem more appropriate.
"The polls don't reflect the full impact of the Palin speech nor the McCain speech."
Ah, so they overrate McCain's chances? Let's wait for the full horror to sink in then and see where he stands after that. :-)
The Palin bounce? She's curvy but not that rounded.
Henry,
"The Washington insider against a woman who put the Governor of Alaska's private jet on e-bay"
About that:
The state has tried selling its unwanted jet online four times and failed. So last week, the Palin administration signed a contract with an Anchorage aircraft broker who thinks he can succeed where eBay couldn't The eBay thing didn't work out very well, said Dan Spencer, director of administrative services for the Department of Public Safety. He's the person charged with trying to get rid of the infamous Westwind II.
http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/story/203814.html
Let's also enjoy why the jet was hated:
Former Gov. Frank Murkowski bought the jet, which cost the state about $2.6 million, over the protests of the Legislature and used it to fly around the state, sometimes mixing campaign errands with government business.
That would be the previous corrupt Republican governor, and not the current corrupt Republican governor.
After he defied almost everyone to acquire it, the jet became a political albatross for Murkowski. Gov. Sarah Palin beat Murkowski bad in last August's Republican primary. One of her campaign promises was to sell the plane and she's been trying to unload it for months.
It certainly is about time that they stopped electing Republicans and changed the way they do government, as McCain suggested.
Frank
It's a sign of how much of the shine has come off Obama that you and others are now trying to sell him as a generic democrat against a generic republican.
It's probably their best bet. Not so much change you can believe in as throw the bums out and give the other bums a turn.
But the Democrats already control Congress and that institution enjoys a lower approval rating than President Bush.
Who has the credibility to bring real change? McCain who has always fought for it and Palin who has done it in Alaska?
Or the two timid party hack the Democrats are running?
Henry,
"Who has the credibility to bring real change? McCain"
The guy who said she sold the plane on ebay for a profit when she didn't sell it on ebay, and (when someone else finally sold it) didn't make a profit?
And you believed him?
"and Palin "
Under investigation for abuse of power?
Plus ca change, plus c'est la McSame chose.
The only poll that matters is election day.
Frank
Stop telling lies about what I said
"The Washington insider against a woman who put the Governor of Alaska's private jet on e-bay"
I said nothing about the sale or the profit.
That is what I said and it is true. But you are at least consistent. You were the person who brought the most disgusting lies of the campaign to this site.
Let me get this right the fact that she got rid of the governors plane is a mark against her because the sale didn't occur through e-bay as originally planned? Oh the horror!
Henry,
"Stop telling lies about what I said"
I didn't. I told the truth about what McCain said, then I asked if you believed him.
You can apologise for your false accusation whenever you like.
So,
- Peter said that McCain/P would have a clear lead in the polls by the weekend
- The weekend has come and McCain/P is still behind in the polls.
- But Peter is still right because, well (sob) becasue I wish he was right,:(
- Noel.
LOL!
Where's David gone?
Ross,
"Let me get this right"
Let's see how you did...
" the fact that she got rid of the governors plane is a mark against her because the sale didn't occur through e-bay as originally planned? "
No the fact that the ebay sale didn't actually work is a rebuttal to the suggestion that it was some kind of genius move that only a hockey mom could come up with.
It also exposes McCain as a liar - on two counts.
1) She didn't sell it on ebay
2) She didn't sell it for a profit
He said she did both.
Frank - what is her corruption? Do you mean the troopergate thing, it seems to be a farce.
And she did take on a not so nice entrenched Republican establishment in Alaska - Obama embraced the not so nice entrenched Democratic establishment in Chicago.
Ah troopergate, even if you assume for a mement that there is substance to the story, which I doubt, it still reveals the massive difference between Obama and Palin.
Allegations of Palin nepotism centre around her trying to get a trooper who tasered an 11 year old fired, allegations of Obama's nepotism centre around him directing a $1 million earmark to his wife's employer who immediately increased her salary by around $200, 000.
Frank
Putting the jet on ebay was a political statement. Selling a jet is a commercial proposition. The voters of Alaska where Palin has an 80% approval rating understand the difference.
Indeed Frank, "corrupt governor"? Facts please.
Ross
The difference is the reporting. Thus a DUI charge aganst Palin's husband in the 80s is new while Obama's drug taking in the 80s is not.
>>Allegations of Palin nepotism centre around her trying to get a trooper who tasered an 11 year old fired,<<
Ross, you omitted to mention that the trooper was her ex-brother-in-law and the 11-yr old her nephew.
I wonder why!
"I wonder why!"
Because I assumed that most readers of this blog knew what "nepotism" meant so that I didn't have to state that it involved family members.
If Obama channeled money to an organisation in order to benfit his wife then he is unfit for political office. If Sarah Palin tried to get an employee sacked because she was annoyed at his divorcing her sister then she too is unfit for office. It is just so predictable that both on the left and the right , supporters will try and downplay or pooh pooh allegations against their favourite poster boy or girl of the moment.
>>I assumed that most readers of this blog knew what "nepotism" meant so that I didn't have to state that it involved family members.<<<
LOL, , so he "didn't have to state..." Ross, you aint fooling nobody. You omitted it to make it sound mild (what, the poor woman, she merely tried to get that bad, BAD trooper fired"!) to distract from the family mess. Note how you really did feel the need to mention the family member in the case of Obama, to help those readers who don't know what nepotism means, no doubt.
Personally, I don't give a tinker's curse if a candidate throws his/her weight around when in office, squanders a bit of cash, pampers a few relatives, or for that matter has two secret bank accounts, three lovers and four illegitimate children.
But I will call hypocrisy when I see it.
Henry,
"The voters of Alaska where Palin has an 80% approval rating understand the difference."
Then perhaps one of them should have run for president, as McCain doesn't.
Why haven't you retracted and apologised for your accusation that I was telling lies about what you said?
Noel - I suspect there is great difficulty in disciplining cops, and this one seems to have quite a few issues (aside from admittedly tasering his 11 year old, I think there are serious threats he made against people).
Cops tend to surround the wagons, even when that means protecting a bad one. No doubt Palin had a stronger interest in this one but I don't see anything overly dramatic in her actions. She might have been better off calling for an independent investigation. But it doesn't seem that serious.
>>But it doesn't seem that serious.<<
Serious? it's highly amusing.
But not as amusing as the attempts by the Palin-drones here to avoid the fact that it is a family affair, which obviously itches them, and which they would delight in if it were only Obama.
As I said, I think this story, and the story of the children and the plane and .., are total trivia.
Mind you, they do serve to reveal vast areas of hypocrisy.
Noel - It is amusing until you realize that a nothing event becomes something that bogs folks down because their political enemies realize that it isn't the facts, it is the drawn out investigation and media swirl that takes away energy from elsewhere. The Clintons went through this with Vince Foster's death, travelgate etc.
It's part of the problem of US politics; once private morality and character background comes into it, and this seems to be what this race is all about (and of course the Pols. bring it on themselves by putting kids in the front row, listing their names at a national party convention for God's sake, constant homely anecdotes and references to private achievements, etc. - all do this) - they can hardly complain when the same stick is used to beat them.
As I’ve said before: you need a political separation of the manager and the moral paragon, a prime minister and a President. That would cut out this personal crap, and maybe then true political skills would emerge, or at least the lack of them be exposed.
Now look at that lad, Bertie Ahern. A man's man and a consummate politician. Bet you never saw him including his wife in any political shin-dig!
Noel: No Thanks. I agree with your point on the overemphasis on certain things in US politics, but a cursory examination of Irish or British politicians and elected officials doesn't leave me with a sense of awe.
>>Irish or British politicians and elected officials doesn't leave me with a sense of awe.<<
Mahons, which group do you seriously think has the higher average intelligence?
A)
Margaret Thatcher
John Major
Tony Blair
Gordon Brown
B)
Gerald Ford
Jimmy Carter
Ronald Regan
George Bush
Bill Clinton
G.W. Bush
(the Ahern reference was a joke, btw. He kept his wife hidden for good reason)
I had a feeling David wouldn't return to this thread!
It will be interesting to see the polls by Monday.
My view is that they are under-estimating the true level of support for the GOP, so if they are "neck and neck" on 4 November the GOP wins. If the GOP has a lead of 3%-5% then it wins easily.
In November 2004 the polls were neck and neck, but Bush had a comfortable win. And he was running against a white opponent. I do not know how the polls are adjusting for the effect of those who say they will vote for Obama, but who will actually vote for McCain on 4 November. But my uneducated guess is that those voters will swing the result to the GOP.
Noel - If you are dipping back to Ford (not our sharpest tool in the shed) don't we have to include Callaghan at least (and my memory escapes me, but I think another PM as well).
As for highest average intelligence George W certainly brings us down, but Clinton had a very high IQ. Has someone calculated this out or am I to guess? The British list contains some political giants (Thatcher, Blair) as does the American (Reagan & Clinton).
Charles,
"Indeed Frank, "corrupt governor"? Facts please."
You're right, I shouldn't have said Murkowski was corrupt. ;-)
Of the two of them, neither have been charged with anything. Palin merely has a history of vindictive dismissals of those who do not do as she demands, and is under investigation for just such an abuse of power.
Ross,
" allegations of Obama's nepotism centre around him directing a $1 million earmark to his wife's employer who immediately increased her salary by around $200, 000."
Her salary was increased because she was promoted to VP. And this direction of an $1m earmark (one of many legitimate requests for hospital funding) can't have been 'immediately' followed by anything since it wasn't included by Congress. Obama has also voted for earmark reform so that sponsorship of earmarks is known (as well as amendments to strengthen that reform), disclosed the earmarks (which is how you know about it), and their tax returns were available (which is how you know Michelle's income), which all would be strange behavior if that allegation were true.
Moreover if the Obamas were in it for the money both could easily have made that kind of money much sooner elsewhere, and indeed Obama already was making far more money from his books.
Noel,
I'd rank both groups evenly. There are different ways to measure intelligence, and differing forms of it. The job of POTUS resembles a prime ministry only in foreign policy.
A prime minister can only get a certain distance from the parliamentary party who chose him as leader. But he can almost always tweak laws at his leisure (major changes may require more effort).
A president can go against his party, as JFK and LBJ did on civil rights, and GWB attempted to do on comprehensive immigration reform. Presidents can and do govern with another party controlling congress.
Churchill and Thatcher could have been presidents. Ford, LBJ and GHWB could have been prime ministers.
Drunken Cyclist,
Too busy doing an interview with the Sunday Times for tomorrow....
Frank: vindictive dismissals. Sometimes known as firing employees. You don't have a corruption case with that.
"Of the two of them, neither have been charged with anything. Palin merely has a history of vindictive dismissals of those who do not do as she demands, and is under investigation for just such an abuse of power."
Last I checked Frankie, it is innocent until proven guilty. None of the accusations against her have been proven and appear to be blown completely out of proportion by a fairly vindictive smear campaign run by certain elements of the media.
"Her salary was increased because she was promoted to VP. "
They renamed her old non-job from "vice president for community and external affairs" from "executive director for community affairs". A simple promotion doesn't usually result in a salary that is 150% higher than at the previous pay grade.
Incidentally it's worth looking at what kind of work Michelle Obama did:
" Hospital brass had gathered to break ground for a children’s building when African-American protesters broke in with bullhorns, drowning out the proceedings with demands that the hospital award more contracts to minority firms.
The executives froze. Mrs. Obama strolled over and offered to meet later, if only the protestors would pipe down. She revised the contracting system, sending so much business to firms owned by women and other minorities that the hospital won awards. "
Does the replacing of the existing contracts with white, or male owned firms counts as a vindictive dismissal of those companies?
Frank wrote, "Her salary was increased because she was promoted to VP."
Yes, she was. Vice-president of community and external affairs. That's a real mission-critcal post, that one.
Even the lefties who love Obama admit that that one is a plum, little or no work, no accountability "political spouse" job.
Mahons,
"Frank - what is her corruption? Do you mean the troopergate thing, it seems to be a farce."
Yes I meant troopergate.
"Sometimes known as firing employees. You don't have a corruption case with that."
True, it just goes to the credibility of the investigation. She appears to have left a trail of destruction going back to her days in Wasilla.
"And she did take on a not so nice entrenched Republican establishment in Alaska"
That depends which version you read.
"Obama embraced the not so nice entrenched Democratic establishment in Chicago."
In what way did Obama 'embrace' it that Sarah Palin did not?
Incidentally I'd love to see an 'over here' piece on the American media and their role in the election. Are they doing their job? Which if any sources do you trust and why?
"As for highest average intelligence George W certainly brings us down, but Clinton had a very high IQ. Has someone calculated this out or am I to guess?"
Someone did try to estimate the IQs of US Presidents, but the methodology was so ludicrous as to be worthless:
http://hnn.us/blogs/entries/31513.html
Whilst a certain minimum intellect is required for the job of PM or President it seems unlikely that there is a straight forward correlation of the higher the IQ the better the leader. I'd guess that the most intellectually gifted man to get into the White House in the last century was Herbert Hoover and he was pretty crap.
Requoting Ross' quote from above:
" Hospital brass had gathered to break ground for a children’s building when African-American protesters broke in with bullhorns, drowning out the proceedings with demands that the hospital award more contracts to minority firms.
The executives froze. Mrs. Obama strolled over and offered to meet later, if only the protestors would pipe down. She revised the contracting system, sending so much business to firms owned by women and other minorities that the hospital won awards. "
Just think--if Obama hadn't been so bored and discouraged with community organizing, he could have been the guy with the bullhorn!
Two data points on McCain's 'change' story.
These are McCain's words from one of his books:
"I didn't decide to run for president to start a national crusade for the political reforms I believed in or to run a campaign as if it were some grand act of patriotism. In truth, I wanted to be president because it had become my ambition to be president. . . . In truth, I'd had the ambition for a long time."
And yet another smackdown from Jon Stewart on the Daily Show:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=184111&title=john-mccains-big-acceptance
Noel Cunningham -
You can do better than that piffle. Thatcher was no intellectual giant, she bought her intellectualism off the shelf from Hayek and the Institute of Economic Affairs. Her genius was in delivering the fruits of their thinking. Major and Blair were completely empty vessels, entirely oblivious of their nation's history and the puppets of their masters. Brown is an intellect of sorts, but then I have an honours and masters degree - how great.
Lady Thatcher and Ronnie Reagan demonstrated the greatest characteristic in a leader - for good and bad - which is instinct. The technocracy can give you the details but the leader sets the direction, and the direction is everything.
and of course the Pols. bring it on themselves by putting kids in the front row, listing their names at a national party convention for God's sake, constant homely anecdotes and references to private achievements, etc. - all do this
True, and the interest is in these pols, not on who has just been appointed chief dogcatcher to Hicksville, Ohio. This absurd focus is because of the incredible powers of the legislature and executive.
The solution is clear - strip government of its awesome power and you remove the tedious, intense attention on the candidates.
Frank - well if it is troopergate that isn't a corruption issue. It is a stretch.
A trail of destruction? Come on. Troll is ATW's exaggeration specialist.
Taking on the Establishment of Republicans in Alaska - I settled for the New York Times, that noted conservative paper and the Associated Press and Anchorage Newspapers I read on line.
Obama's joined up with the Democratic machine in Chicago and embraced a lot of the even more radical extremists in the Windy City (he kinda had to cause as a half-white Ivy League lawyer he had the street credibility of Pat Boone).
Good topic suggestion though, I'll try that on Sunday.