As the current election campaign has drawn on, the economy has slowly displaced all other issues in contention. However, a sizeable amount of swing voters are going to make their decisions based on the character of the candidates, rather than any major policy differences. In this respect, it is interesting to look at how the candidates have portrayed their respective backgrounds.
Barack Obama has, in one sense, had a harder time of it. After all, he cannot go on too much about race without being accused of playing the race card, which is regarded as a dangerous move, to put it mildly. A number of African-American candidates, notably Jesse Jackson in 1988, have overplayed the race card, and suffered in his campaign, which became increasingly polarised along racial lines.
Obama also has another advantage, in that the African-American vote is firmly behind him already. As a result, he is attempting to portray himself as a post-racial candidate, who was born too late to take part in the culture wars of the 1960s, or to have been a major civil-rights figure. While he has had a number of trip-ups, most notably the debacle over Reverend Jeremiah Wright, he is currently managing the difficult act of keeping African-Americans fired up about his candidacy, while reassuring non-blacks that he is a safe bet as well.
John McCain's background is more firmly rooted in the polarisation of American politics that began in the 1960s. His character, as presented to the media, is firmly rooted in his service in Vietnam, and the five years he spent as a POW there. Unlike Obama, who is secure in his voter base and is now trying to court independents and moderate Republicans, McCain has still not fully stifled doubts among the evangelical right about his candidacy. While the selection of Sarah Palin undoubtedly helped, McCain is still trying to shore up his position, and reminding them that he served in Vietnam, and has the scars to prove it, is one way of trying to encourage a high turnout.
Unfortunately, this places John McCain firmly on one side of the partisan divide. The Vietnam War scarred a generation of Americans. While there are undoubtedly many people who regard McCain as a hero and patriot as a result of his service, there are also a large number who regard Vietnam as something best forgotten, or as a stain on American history in which McCain played a brutal part, flying bombing missions agains North Vietnamese cities.
As a result, both candidates have taken differing approaches to the things that defined them. On the one hand, Barack Obama may end up falling victim to racial polarisation anyway. On the other, John McCain would do well to remember that, alongside that of the angry black man, the angry Vietnam vet is a dangerous stereotype to conform to.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Debate 3
The third presidential debate has been referred to, with some justification, as John McCain's last stand. After a string of bad news in the polls, coupled with a widespread perception that Barack Obama won the first two debates, McCain now needs the third debate to be a convincing victory.
As a result, we can expect McCain to go all out for victory this time around. He will be trying to avoid the mistakes that affected his performance in the previous two debates, such as failing to look his opponent in the eye, or the farcical "that one" comment. In terms of content, expect attacks on Obama's character. William Ayers, Tony Rezko, and Jeremiah Wright will probably be referenced, as well as Obama's youth and lack of experience.
In addition, McCain needs to sound strong on economic issues. His latest plan, a $300,000,000,000 mortgage bailout, needs to be fleshed out, and sold to a sceptical audience. He needs to remind people that foreign policy will be a central part of the next president's term, and that this is where he is strongest. He must, above all, avoid appearing uncertain, or making any major gaffes.
For Barack Obama, the challenge is perhaps simpler. All he needs to do is avoid a major error, and in this case a draw will be as good as a win for him. He is likely to have a lot of mud flung at him by McCain, and not losing his cool in the face of this will be important. He may take the opportunity to raise questions about McCain's involvement in the Keating Scandal in the 1980s, though the efficacy of this might be doubtful.
Each candidate will try to frame the debate around their strengths. Obama has to make sure that he retains his lead on economic issues, while McCain will have to find some way of undercutting this. McCain will also have to try and make inroads into Obama's healthcare plans. As the stockmarket has gone downhill, a large number of elderly Americans now find their financial security at risk, and polls have consistently shown that people believe that Obama is more likely to fix the healthcare crisis.
Barack Obama and John McCain have different objectives from this debate. Obama must try to stay cool and solidify the public perceptions of him as a better manager of the economy and healthcare, while McCain has to damage Obama enough, either through refuting his policies or attacking his character, to bring himself back into the race. If he fails to do so, his already dwindling chances in this campaign will look even slimmer.
As a result, we can expect McCain to go all out for victory this time around. He will be trying to avoid the mistakes that affected his performance in the previous two debates, such as failing to look his opponent in the eye, or the farcical "that one" comment. In terms of content, expect attacks on Obama's character. William Ayers, Tony Rezko, and Jeremiah Wright will probably be referenced, as well as Obama's youth and lack of experience.
In addition, McCain needs to sound strong on economic issues. His latest plan, a $300,000,000,000 mortgage bailout, needs to be fleshed out, and sold to a sceptical audience. He needs to remind people that foreign policy will be a central part of the next president's term, and that this is where he is strongest. He must, above all, avoid appearing uncertain, or making any major gaffes.
For Barack Obama, the challenge is perhaps simpler. All he needs to do is avoid a major error, and in this case a draw will be as good as a win for him. He is likely to have a lot of mud flung at him by McCain, and not losing his cool in the face of this will be important. He may take the opportunity to raise questions about McCain's involvement in the Keating Scandal in the 1980s, though the efficacy of this might be doubtful.
Each candidate will try to frame the debate around their strengths. Obama has to make sure that he retains his lead on economic issues, while McCain will have to find some way of undercutting this. McCain will also have to try and make inroads into Obama's healthcare plans. As the stockmarket has gone downhill, a large number of elderly Americans now find their financial security at risk, and polls have consistently shown that people believe that Obama is more likely to fix the healthcare crisis.
Barack Obama and John McCain have different objectives from this debate. Obama must try to stay cool and solidify the public perceptions of him as a better manager of the economy and healthcare, while McCain has to damage Obama enough, either through refuting his policies or attacking his character, to bring himself back into the race. If he fails to do so, his already dwindling chances in this campaign will look even slimmer.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
The Electoral Map Shifts
One of the most telling moments in the election so far was when John McCain shut down his campaign in Michigan. The state had been carried by John Kerry by a margin of only 3 points in 2004, and it had been widely targeted by the McCain camp as a possible insurance policy against a defeat in Ohio. However, as the campaign wore on, it became clear that the state was going to remain blue, and resources had to be shifted to counter Barack Obama's increasing inroads in traditionally Republican states.
As a result, John McCain's strategy now hinges on defending all the states that George Bush won in 2004, and targeting a few potentially vulnerable Democratic ones. Only four states, Minnesota, Wisconsin, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania fall into this category, and of these, only Pennsylvania is big enough to offset the loss of Ohio or Florida, both of which look to be a challenge for the Republicans to hold. In addition, in all of the above states, Barack Obama is holding a reasonable lead at the moment.
The Obama camp started out with grand ideas about redrawing the electoral map, making headway into the South, and turning traditionally red states like Georgia into battlefields. While this has not quite been achieved, there is no doubt that McCain will have to defend a lot of states that were previously thought safe.
At this point, there is a strong chance that Iowa and New Mexico, which voted for Bush in 2004, will fall to the Democrats. This puts Barack Obama on 264 Electoral College votes, tantalisingly close to the 270 he needs to be elected. To get the extra six he needs, Obama has plenty of options. He could flip traditional swing states such as Ohio or Florida, either of which would put him in the White House even without Iowa and New Mexico. Alternatively, a gaggle of states have been put in play by John McCain's recent slump in the polls. Virginia, which hasn't voted for a Democratic candidate since 1964, or Missouri, which has been regarded as a bellweather state for decades, would both fall into this category. Virginia, in particular, has been trending Democratic in recent years. It's governor, Tim Kaine, is a Democrat, as is one of its senators, Jim Webb. In addition, when Republican senator John Warner steps down this year, his most likely successor will be a Democrat, Mark Warner (no relation).
Perhaps the biggest indicator of the scale of the swing towards Obama is that the McCain campaign is now on the defensive in North Carolina, a Deep South state which hasn't voted Democrat since the days of segregation. In addition, recent appearances by the candidates in Republican strongholds like Indiana and West Virginia suggest that McCain's campaign has serious worries about their vulnerability, and there is a genuine fear among Republicans that they could be trounced in this election, and reduced to a rump of safe states in the Deep South and the Midwest, making a 2012 comeback a difficult prospect.
John McCain faces a daunting task. Assuming that Iowa and New Mexico fall to Obama, he cannot lose a single other state. Given the current political climate, the idea of him holding onto all of Nevada, Colorado, Ohio, Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, Indiana, Missouri, and West Virginia borders on the miraculous. Unfortunately, he has no choice but to try.
As a result, John McCain's strategy now hinges on defending all the states that George Bush won in 2004, and targeting a few potentially vulnerable Democratic ones. Only four states, Minnesota, Wisconsin, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania fall into this category, and of these, only Pennsylvania is big enough to offset the loss of Ohio or Florida, both of which look to be a challenge for the Republicans to hold. In addition, in all of the above states, Barack Obama is holding a reasonable lead at the moment.
The Obama camp started out with grand ideas about redrawing the electoral map, making headway into the South, and turning traditionally red states like Georgia into battlefields. While this has not quite been achieved, there is no doubt that McCain will have to defend a lot of states that were previously thought safe.
At this point, there is a strong chance that Iowa and New Mexico, which voted for Bush in 2004, will fall to the Democrats. This puts Barack Obama on 264 Electoral College votes, tantalisingly close to the 270 he needs to be elected. To get the extra six he needs, Obama has plenty of options. He could flip traditional swing states such as Ohio or Florida, either of which would put him in the White House even without Iowa and New Mexico. Alternatively, a gaggle of states have been put in play by John McCain's recent slump in the polls. Virginia, which hasn't voted for a Democratic candidate since 1964, or Missouri, which has been regarded as a bellweather state for decades, would both fall into this category. Virginia, in particular, has been trending Democratic in recent years. It's governor, Tim Kaine, is a Democrat, as is one of its senators, Jim Webb. In addition, when Republican senator John Warner steps down this year, his most likely successor will be a Democrat, Mark Warner (no relation).
Perhaps the biggest indicator of the scale of the swing towards Obama is that the McCain campaign is now on the defensive in North Carolina, a Deep South state which hasn't voted Democrat since the days of segregation. In addition, recent appearances by the candidates in Republican strongholds like Indiana and West Virginia suggest that McCain's campaign has serious worries about their vulnerability, and there is a genuine fear among Republicans that they could be trounced in this election, and reduced to a rump of safe states in the Deep South and the Midwest, making a 2012 comeback a difficult prospect.
John McCain faces a daunting task. Assuming that Iowa and New Mexico fall to Obama, he cannot lose a single other state. Given the current political climate, the idea of him holding onto all of Nevada, Colorado, Ohio, Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, Indiana, Missouri, and West Virginia borders on the miraculous. Unfortunately, he has no choice but to try.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
The Gloves come off
In an election that was being fought between two men who have put huge amounts of efforts into talking up their bipartisan skills, it was perhaps disappointing to see the slew of negative campaigning that emerged in the past week or so. Both candidates have tried to smear the other, most notably when Sarah Palin used Barack Obama's tenuous association with Bill Ayers, a former founder of the Weather Underground who is now a respected college professor, to claim that Obama was "palling around with terrorists". However, Obama has also shot back with some ads of his own that both tarnish John McCain and fail what Karl Rove once referred to as "the 100% truth test".
In McCain's case, it is perhaps more understandable. He is quite clearly out of his depth on the issues side of things. As the economy takes centre stage to an ever greater degree, McCain's decades at the centre of the foreign policy apparatus look less important. At a rough guess, every point the Dow drops gains Obama about 2,500 votes, and unless McCain can somehow convince voters that he, an admiral's son married to a millionaire, understands their problems and can deal with them more effectively than Obama, it will be exceedingly difficult for him to win in November. This becomes even more important when the swing states are taken into account. McCain has now given up in Michigan, a state John Kerry only carried by three points in 2004. He is now having to defend once-solid leads in both Ohio and Indiana, which have been hit hard by economic problems in the past few years.
As a result, John McCain has decided to take an alternative route to the presidency, namely by trying to paint Barack Obama as unfit for command. He is not the first to do so, and was himself on the receiving end of one of the most vitriolic smear campaigns of modern times in the 2000 South Carolina primaries. However, it is certainly a huge disappointment that a man who has sold himself as an old-style patriot, willing to cross the aisle when necessary, has resorted to the win-at-any-cost methods that came to define much of the George W. Bush presidency. There is also a danger for McCain that, by following these policies, he may well have trouble breaking free from the association with Bush, his most persistent millstone.
Another potential pitfall of McCain's tactics is that they leave him open to being attacked himself. Obama can now piously claim that he did not wish to engage in negative campaigning, but has been forced into it, and unleash a barrage of attack ads. McCain's family, his association with the Keating scandal in the 1980s, and perhaps most importantly his age, can now be considered targets, and McCain may not emerge unscathed.
Perhaps the biggest problem that McCain has is that his campaign may simply appear to many Americans to be a distraction from the problems America faces today. As the economy gets weaker, it will become more of an issue. Perhaps Obama's strongest card would be to stop any attacks on McCain's character, and simply brush off any attacks on his own as evidence that McCain cares more about the presidency than the economy. If Obama can paint himself as the natural leader, John McCain's already difficult task will become nearly impossible.
In McCain's case, it is perhaps more understandable. He is quite clearly out of his depth on the issues side of things. As the economy takes centre stage to an ever greater degree, McCain's decades at the centre of the foreign policy apparatus look less important. At a rough guess, every point the Dow drops gains Obama about 2,500 votes, and unless McCain can somehow convince voters that he, an admiral's son married to a millionaire, understands their problems and can deal with them more effectively than Obama, it will be exceedingly difficult for him to win in November. This becomes even more important when the swing states are taken into account. McCain has now given up in Michigan, a state John Kerry only carried by three points in 2004. He is now having to defend once-solid leads in both Ohio and Indiana, which have been hit hard by economic problems in the past few years.
As a result, John McCain has decided to take an alternative route to the presidency, namely by trying to paint Barack Obama as unfit for command. He is not the first to do so, and was himself on the receiving end of one of the most vitriolic smear campaigns of modern times in the 2000 South Carolina primaries. However, it is certainly a huge disappointment that a man who has sold himself as an old-style patriot, willing to cross the aisle when necessary, has resorted to the win-at-any-cost methods that came to define much of the George W. Bush presidency. There is also a danger for McCain that, by following these policies, he may well have trouble breaking free from the association with Bush, his most persistent millstone.
Another potential pitfall of McCain's tactics is that they leave him open to being attacked himself. Obama can now piously claim that he did not wish to engage in negative campaigning, but has been forced into it, and unleash a barrage of attack ads. McCain's family, his association with the Keating scandal in the 1980s, and perhaps most importantly his age, can now be considered targets, and McCain may not emerge unscathed.
Perhaps the biggest problem that McCain has is that his campaign may simply appear to many Americans to be a distraction from the problems America faces today. As the economy gets weaker, it will become more of an issue. Perhaps Obama's strongest card would be to stop any attacks on McCain's character, and simply brush off any attacks on his own as evidence that McCain cares more about the presidency than the economy. If Obama can paint himself as the natural leader, John McCain's already difficult task will become nearly impossible.
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Obama's Foreign Policy team
Barack Obama faces two challenges in naming his foreign policy advisors. Firstly, he must name competent individuals in an effort to shore up his reputation as a foreign policy naif. Secondly, and in a contradictory direction, he must also try to keep his message of "change" running through all his appointments. Balancing these two will likely prove a difficult task.
In terms of the National Security Advisor, a good bet would be for Richard Clarke to come back to the White House. Clarke, who was Bill Clinton's counterterrorism czar, has been an outspoken critic of the current administration's counterterror policy, and an early casualty of the Iraq war. he is also on record as warning the Bush team, as they came into office in 2001, that an Al-Qaeda attack was on the cards.
Obama's big chance to play the bipartisan card is in picking the Secretary of Defense. For this post, the most likely candidate is probably Chuck Hagel. Currently, Hagel is a final-term Republican senator with a reputation for independent-mindedness. In addition, he has a strong background in defense, and was a strong critic of both the Iraq War and Donald Rumsfeld. Alternatively, Robert Gates, the current incumbent, could keep his position.
There is no obvious candidate for the position of Secretary of State. It is possible that Obama may select someone from within the State Department, or go outside the government altogether. However, there is another interesting possibility. A stellar candidate exists, with excellent government experience, who is respected in both America and across the world. This person's recognition factor alone would be helpful, as would their track record in conflict resolution and diplomacy. The only problem is, would Bill Clinton be willing to serve in an Obama presidency?
In terms of the National Security Advisor, a good bet would be for Richard Clarke to come back to the White House. Clarke, who was Bill Clinton's counterterrorism czar, has been an outspoken critic of the current administration's counterterror policy, and an early casualty of the Iraq war. he is also on record as warning the Bush team, as they came into office in 2001, that an Al-Qaeda attack was on the cards.
Obama's big chance to play the bipartisan card is in picking the Secretary of Defense. For this post, the most likely candidate is probably Chuck Hagel. Currently, Hagel is a final-term Republican senator with a reputation for independent-mindedness. In addition, he has a strong background in defense, and was a strong critic of both the Iraq War and Donald Rumsfeld. Alternatively, Robert Gates, the current incumbent, could keep his position.
There is no obvious candidate for the position of Secretary of State. It is possible that Obama may select someone from within the State Department, or go outside the government altogether. However, there is another interesting possibility. A stellar candidate exists, with excellent government experience, who is respected in both America and across the world. This person's recognition factor alone would be helpful, as would their track record in conflict resolution and diplomacy. The only problem is, would Bill Clinton be willing to serve in an Obama presidency?
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Who'll be Running McCain's Foreign Policy?
In an election where foreign policy was expected to play an important role before the economy became a central issue, it is interesting to speculate on the individuals who will be involved in the national security/foreign policy apparatus, depending on which candidate wins. In this posting, I intend to look at some of the likely contenders for the positions of Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense and National Security Advisor in both John McCain and Barack Obama's potential cabinets
In many respects, John McCain has a harder task. Given that so much of the George W. Bush national security team has been discredited by the conduct of the Iraq War, he cannot afford to retain many in their current positions. However, this means looking at either bringing in outsiders, or going back sixteen years to the administration of Bush Senior, and picking individuals who were second-tier at the time. The danger of either course is that it either brings in candidates with little experience, or who are too old and rooted in a supposed Cold War mentality.
The major candidate for retention is probably Bob Gates at the Pentagon. McCain was an outspoken critic of Donald Rumsfeld long before it was fashionable, and Gates has been reasonably successful in his job, and enjoys bipartisan support in the Senate. In addition, his strong record in the first Bush administration both toughens up his resume and gives him a reputation independent of that of George W. Bush. Alternatively, McCain could go for someone like Joe Lieberman, in an attempt to bolster his cross-party credentials, or potentially someone within the military.
However, the most likely position to be filled by a military man is probably that of National Security Advisor, which has been filled by several military men in its history. The most likely candidate for this is probably retired Army General Jack Keane. Keane was, alongside McCain, one of the early advocates of the surge, and has worked closely with General David Petraeus in bringing it to fruition. In addition, it was a 2006 report by Keane and Frederick Kagan that laid out the theoretical framework for the surge, so he can claim a good deal of the credit for it success. Other candidates include Petraeus himslef, retired Army General Eric Shinseki, and John Negroponte, currently Deputy Secretary of State and former Ambassador to Iraq.
Negroponte is also a possibility to go upstairs to become Secretary of State. His length of experience, particularly in the Middle East, would certainly qualify him for the job. However, at the same time, his human rights record while ambassador to Honduras in the 1980s was somewhat dodgy, and his ties to the current administration, as well as the fact that he oversaw Iraq's descent into chaos, may mitigate against him. A more interesting candidate would be Negroponte's successor as Ambassador to Iraq and then the UN, Zalmay Khalilzad. Khalilzad has a wealth of experience in the Middle East, having been Ambassador to both Iraq and Afghanistan after the overthrow of the regimes there. More importantly, he is Afghan-born, and is a Sunni Muslim. The symbolism of appointing such an individual to the top diplomatic post on the planet should not be underestimated.
In many respects, John McCain has a harder task. Given that so much of the George W. Bush national security team has been discredited by the conduct of the Iraq War, he cannot afford to retain many in their current positions. However, this means looking at either bringing in outsiders, or going back sixteen years to the administration of Bush Senior, and picking individuals who were second-tier at the time. The danger of either course is that it either brings in candidates with little experience, or who are too old and rooted in a supposed Cold War mentality.
The major candidate for retention is probably Bob Gates at the Pentagon. McCain was an outspoken critic of Donald Rumsfeld long before it was fashionable, and Gates has been reasonably successful in his job, and enjoys bipartisan support in the Senate. In addition, his strong record in the first Bush administration both toughens up his resume and gives him a reputation independent of that of George W. Bush. Alternatively, McCain could go for someone like Joe Lieberman, in an attempt to bolster his cross-party credentials, or potentially someone within the military.
However, the most likely position to be filled by a military man is probably that of National Security Advisor, which has been filled by several military men in its history. The most likely candidate for this is probably retired Army General Jack Keane. Keane was, alongside McCain, one of the early advocates of the surge, and has worked closely with General David Petraeus in bringing it to fruition. In addition, it was a 2006 report by Keane and Frederick Kagan that laid out the theoretical framework for the surge, so he can claim a good deal of the credit for it success. Other candidates include Petraeus himslef, retired Army General Eric Shinseki, and John Negroponte, currently Deputy Secretary of State and former Ambassador to Iraq.
Negroponte is also a possibility to go upstairs to become Secretary of State. His length of experience, particularly in the Middle East, would certainly qualify him for the job. However, at the same time, his human rights record while ambassador to Honduras in the 1980s was somewhat dodgy, and his ties to the current administration, as well as the fact that he oversaw Iraq's descent into chaos, may mitigate against him. A more interesting candidate would be Negroponte's successor as Ambassador to Iraq and then the UN, Zalmay Khalilzad. Khalilzad has a wealth of experience in the Middle East, having been Ambassador to both Iraq and Afghanistan after the overthrow of the regimes there. More importantly, he is Afghan-born, and is a Sunni Muslim. The symbolism of appointing such an individual to the top diplomatic post on the planet should not be underestimated.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
The Shine comes off Sarah Palin
It is now several weeks since John McCain unleashed a political earthquake by naming the little-known governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin, as his running mate. In retrospect, his reasoning seems clear: as things stood, he was trailing Barack Obama in all polls, and given that Obama had just nominated Senate heavyweight Joe Biden as his running mate, something was needed to shake things up.
And shake things up she did. After the Republican convention, polls for the first time showed McCain leading. White women, already bitter about the defeat of Hillary Clinton in the primaries, rallied around a new standard bearer, with a swing in that demographic of twenty points in a week. The religious right, meanwhile, which had been sceptical about McCain, now had a new icon.
However, more recently, questions are beginning to emerge. Despite all the claims by the McCain camp that Palin represented a fellow maverick, it has become very hard to defend some of Palin's credentials. In particular, it emerged that, despite her vaunted fiscal credentials, she requested millions in federal assistance as mayor of Wasilla, and was a big proponent of the Gravina Island "Bridge to Nowhere", before it became clear that the project was sunk.
Similarly, in terms of supposed foreign policy credentials, Sarah Palin listed the countries she has visited: Canada, Ireland, Kuwait, Iraq and Germany. In and of itself this is not particularly impressive, but when it became clear that her visit to Ireland was a refuelling stop at Shannon, and that she only went as far as the Iraqi border with Kuwait, not only does her resume become 40% thinner, but she can, with some justification, be accused of playing fast and loose with the truth.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, her status as a dyed-in-the-wool conservative, which has pleased the right wing of the Republican party no end, may backfire among moderates. While most Americans may not fully believe in Darwinian evolution, most aren't Young Earth Creationists either, and oppose the idea of teaching it in schools. Similarly, it becomes very hard for John McCain to bolster his claims to be pro-stem cells and emission capping when his running mate has been on record as being opposed to both.
John McCain took a gamble with Sarah Palin. He picked her on the basis of a single meeting, a fact which in itself raises questions about his judgement. However, the polls showed he needed to gamble. Whether or not it pays off remains to be seen.
And shake things up she did. After the Republican convention, polls for the first time showed McCain leading. White women, already bitter about the defeat of Hillary Clinton in the primaries, rallied around a new standard bearer, with a swing in that demographic of twenty points in a week. The religious right, meanwhile, which had been sceptical about McCain, now had a new icon.
However, more recently, questions are beginning to emerge. Despite all the claims by the McCain camp that Palin represented a fellow maverick, it has become very hard to defend some of Palin's credentials. In particular, it emerged that, despite her vaunted fiscal credentials, she requested millions in federal assistance as mayor of Wasilla, and was a big proponent of the Gravina Island "Bridge to Nowhere", before it became clear that the project was sunk.
Similarly, in terms of supposed foreign policy credentials, Sarah Palin listed the countries she has visited: Canada, Ireland, Kuwait, Iraq and Germany. In and of itself this is not particularly impressive, but when it became clear that her visit to Ireland was a refuelling stop at Shannon, and that she only went as far as the Iraqi border with Kuwait, not only does her resume become 40% thinner, but she can, with some justification, be accused of playing fast and loose with the truth.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, her status as a dyed-in-the-wool conservative, which has pleased the right wing of the Republican party no end, may backfire among moderates. While most Americans may not fully believe in Darwinian evolution, most aren't Young Earth Creationists either, and oppose the idea of teaching it in schools. Similarly, it becomes very hard for John McCain to bolster his claims to be pro-stem cells and emission capping when his running mate has been on record as being opposed to both.
John McCain took a gamble with Sarah Palin. He picked her on the basis of a single meeting, a fact which in itself raises questions about his judgement. However, the polls showed he needed to gamble. Whether or not it pays off remains to be seen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)