John McCain's vice presidential pick seems to have created quite a stir, at least amongst people I've come across. I personally like the idea of Sarah Palin being in office. I think. As with everything in life, there are two sides to every coin. It seems that with every pro to Palin, there is a con. Anyway, she didn't seem to get the same sort of approval or hype that, say, Mitt Romney would have gotten.
I'll start off by giving a very brief overview of some of the reasons opposing this pick and why I am a bit nervous of the pick. First off, she is a woman. I don't know that I really have a problem with it, but I will say that I would like to be OK with it. I know some people think that women can't lead as well as men, which comes across as quite chauvinistic (and may or may not be true), but that's not really the point. Regardless of whether or not Palin being a woman affects her judgement and leadership ability, it definitely has an impact on the election.
Secondly, she trumps even Obama in terms of experience. In her short career in politics, Sarah Palin has served most notably as a small town mayor and Alaskan governor. Most have said that by picking Palin as VP, the Republican party threw out the experience card they have been playing for some time now.
Alright, on to the advantages. Perhaps the biggest factor in picking Palin is that she is very conservative. She falls in the right place on the conservative issues McCain doesn't, and backs him up on the others. She's strongly pro-life, same sex marriage, and a member of the NRA. I'll begin to delve a little deeper in to the pros and cons and we'll start to see how they all tie together.
While some are apprehensive because of Palin's gender, I am actually quite excited. There is a possibility that some conservatives won't vote for the McCain ticket because of her gender, but I believe her gender, if even a factor, will draw in more votes than it loses. So if she causes McCain to lose votes, where to they go? Most likely to some insignificant candidate like Bob Barr or Ralph Nader. But what about the votes she brings in, where do they come from? Most likely from Democratic voters who previously would have voted Obama. That sounds like a fair trade to me; losing a few conservative votes to insignificant candidates while stealing a large number of votes from the only other candidate with a shot at winning. Granted, this is all speculation at this point, but I have some reasoning behind it. For reasons including those Kenneth brought up in his post about compassion, there are a lot of female Democratic voters out there. I may take some flack for this, but I'm going to say it anyway: women vote more with their feelings than they do with their brains. I've heard a number that said 70% of women who voted for Clinton did so because of his looks. That doesn't really surprise me. With "thinking" like that, that leads me to believe that perhaps a similar percentage of women will vote for McCain/Palin simply because Palin is a woman. Will Palin's gender really play that big of a role on the final vote count? Who knows. But I personally don't see it as that big of a stretch.
Now onto her inexperience. It is true, Sarah Palin has practically no political experience, at least not when compared to the level expected of such a high profile position. As I briefly mentioned earlier, the McCain campaign has really been hitting the Obama party hard on this experience issue. However, there is one key discrepancy to note: Obama is running for president and Palin is running for vice president. So even if experience is a factor for a person, which is clearly isn't for many, wouldn't one still rather vote for a veteran president and a new vp than an inexperience president and veteran vp? To me, the difference between vice president and president is huge. I see the vice presidency as a position of influence whereas the presidency is a position of final say. I personally don't have a problem with Palin's inexperience because I fully trust McCain has the knowhow to compensate for any potential problems it may bring about. The bottom line here is that anyone whose vote is affected by experience will choose McCain over Obama if they just stop and think.
Finally, conservative voters should be thrilled that McCain picked Palin. I have to admit, I did want Mitt Romney, both for his conservative views (which have been questioned) and for his role he would play in the economy. If there's one real problem with this pick it's that the McCain ticket is unlikely to radically improve the economy, not that Obama will do anything to help it out either. The heart of the matter here, though, is that Palin is a hardline conservative who is unafraid to stick up for her beliefs. Perhaps it is because she hasn't been around politics long, but she truly is a maverick who hasn't been tainted by the political world. She doesn't worry about consequences but does what she believes in.
She is conservative on all the issues that matter most to conservatives. One of the big protests I felt and heard about McCain being the Republican nominee is how moderate he is. Recently, he's really been appealing to the conservatives and I honestly don't know where he stands anymore. But I do know where Palin stands and I do believe that she will motivate McCain to fall on the conservative side of key issues. Most of us know by now that Palin gave birth to a child with down syndrome that she could have aborted early into pregnancy. As pro-choice as Obama is, that is how pro-life Palin is. While McCain seems to be OK with letting politicians and the people work out the abortion issue, Palin is motivated in banning it and in overturning Roe v. Wade. She also opposes same sex marriages, which McCain again has chosen to allow the people to decide. On these key conservative issues, McCain hasn't shown a strong stance, but Palin definitely lines up with conservatives, which should provide some comfort for them.
Palin also lines up on a lot of issues with McCain, which should help to further their cause. Being a member of the NRA is another plus to Palin. Not only that, but she has been known to hunt big game (yes, even caribou that the tree-huggers are using as a defense to drilling in Alaska). Sure, McCain has more than locked up all of the pro-gun voters, but picking a running mate with the same views can never hurt. It further solidifies that this administration will do everything within its power to protect our second amendment rights. Oh yeah, Palin also fully supports drilling for oil. It should be noted that Palin is from Alaska. She should know the ins and outs, pros and cons of the situation and may persuade those slightly opposed to drilling.
I could go on and on about Palin, McCain and their views all day (and you could say I have) but I will try and wrap this up. Here's the long and short of it: Palin helps the McCain ticket far more than he hurts it. There are people who say this move was out of desperation or that it's all pandering. Not true. Palin is a very solid pick that McCain made willingly and for the purpose of bettering America. Palin being a woman will likely pull in more moderates, even some democrats, and her conservative values should pull in the conservatives turned off by her gender. McCain didn't need a desperate move to win the election, and I don't believe that's what he's done here. As election day nears, I hope that more and more voters will begin to realize how competent and dynamic of a veep candidate Sarah Palin is.
3 comments:
I agree that Palin was a wise choice for McCain's VP running mate for the reasons that Clint mentioned, however I have some reservations about her.
With Hillary out of the running, all of her sympathizers will, if truly led by gender alone, want to vote for Palin simply because she is a woman. I don't think, however, that she will win the majority of women voters because the women voters who planned on voting for Hillary solely because of gender, are usually feminists. Feminists usually never vote on the conservative ticket because of the issue of abortion. Believing that it is a woman's right and choice, they will stand strongly on that principle, and vote for the more liberal candidate. A woman Vice President, I don't think, will sway them enough to vote against some of their core beliefs.
Another worry I have about Palin is where her priorities lie. While she is staunchly conservative (by worldly standards), she also has five children, one recently born with Down's Syndrome. I have to question whether or not she can truly raise her children with the love, discipline, and attention they need if she becomes VP of the United States. Not only does she have five children, but one of them is a special needs child, and will need more attention and care than any of her other children needed before. I am all for raising a family and working, but let's face it, Palin is not wonder woman, and with the United States in war times and in an economic pinch, to put it very lightly, the demands are just too much for any person. I'm not necessarily saying that Palin neglects her children and can't raise them correctly if in the political spotlight, but I'm not sure she's truly taken the time to consider the time burdens that will be placed on her during a role as VP. With the way media is today, her family will constantly be in the spotlight. In any family, if less time is devoted to the children and home life, and more time devoted to work, discipline problems usually begin to develop and the family unit will have a hard time sticking together. So while it is wonderful that Palin gravitates toward keeping marriage heterosexual and promoting family in that way, I would hope that she doesn't neglect promoting family in the best way possible: by example.
I do realize that she was the governor of Alaska, and that she also supposedly has some of the highest approval ratings in the US. However, I'm not sure if either of these sway me towards her more. For starters, she was the governor of Alaska, not New York or California. I don't mean to downplay her experience as a governor, however Alaska has population of only 670,053 people, which is 300,000 less than Montana's population. Also, with her conservative stances, her approval rating, I would assume, would plummet if she was the governor of say, New York or Pennsylvania. With so small a population and with the majority of citizens voting republican (119,811 vs. 72,668 for the democratic party), I'd say that this was a slightly biased statement that her approval rating is one of the highest in the US.
All this being said, I seem to be picking out her flaws, however I do still think that she was a wise choice for most of the reasons that Clint mentioned, and because on the off chance that the feminists vote for her simply because she is a woman, McCain might very well be in office because of Palin. I am also thrilled to have a true conservative somewhere on the ballot where my vote my will actually make a difference. So, although I have some reservations about her, I am ultimately glad that Palin is McCain's running mate.
I'm with you Clint... Check out this blog about all the crap thats going on in the press: http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NDU3Nzc1NjEzNGQzYTQ0NTA1YjM0M2UzNzNkODU3ODQ=
you know my views on her Clint, like i told you before I'd freaking marry the woman, but i honestly do appreciate that you and Austin are willing to get this kind of positive and much needed information out to the generally ignorant public. I have always believed that men should be leading men, as well being head of the household and definitely of the country but your "helpmate" comment really resonates with something inside me. I really believe that, despite her inexperience Palin is the right choice for McCain, and her being a Washington outsider with a strong history of fighting corruption within her own party is a definite plus in my book.
Post a Comment