You’re take on the criteria for a VP is different from the normal political logic. Normally the prime criteria is considered to be “Do No Harm” and the secondary criteria is “Bring Electoral Votes.”

I like your view better

Perhaps the prime criteria for any presidential candidate’s choice for running mate is: this person is most likely to help me be elected.

If the presidential candidate is convinced of the integrity of his own views, a selection in this manner perhaps should not be faulted. For if that person helps him be elected, he can most ably be true to his own philosophy.

Maybe I’m too partisan to notice the other side (and maybe you are too), but all of the coded language I’ve seen has been on the Republican side. Obama is “elitist”. He uses a terrorist fist bump. He’s “uppity”. He’s dangerous, foreign. A muslim (an attack which is not only not true but shouldn’t be the basis for an attack even if it was). He’s even been called the Antichrist.

I’d also like to see a quote from the Obama camp that is a family slur. I’ve mostly seen Republicans use this tactic (again, I might not notice it going the other way – enlighten me). Limbaugh once called Chelsea Clinton the family dog, and McCain famously jokes that Chelsea was so ugly because her parents were Hillary Clinton and Janet Reno.

And the Obama campaign’s answer to the beloved Sarah Palin’s speech two nights ago, which mostly consisted of bashing Obama, was simply along the lines of, “I heard a lot about me, but not a lot about you, the middle class, or the things you care about on an everyday basis.”

One side is taking the high road here, the other is USING gender, while pretending the other side is. Maybe we just have a different idea of which party is which…

Don’t worry about it. I hardly consider discussing the political merits of a candidate, campaign strategy, or political advertisement to be arguing politics. After all it’s really comparable to any other technical discussion.

While it’s true that Obama has also received an increased influx of donations since the Palin nomination, it’s not comparable to the increase in McCain’s funding. For McCain this is big jump in funding, whereas for Obama it’s just a slight bump. This essentially puts McCain back in the race financially. Considering that he’s been doing quite well without funding comparable to Obama’s this is significant.

Actually, Obama has “talked” about race using coded language (I’m borrowing the phrase from the opposition) and not-so-subtle allusions throughout his campaign. A lot of his followers have jumped on those statements and tried their best (worst?) to make this election about race. It was to be expected though; I don’t know how we could have avoided it in this election and I believe it’s a painful but necessary process for the nation.

As for family slurs, most of the MSM coverage of Palin and most of the rhetoric coming out of the Obama camp – though NOT out of either Obama – has been little more than attacks of Palin’s family or prurient commentary on her former beauty queen and model roles.

That’s the type of behavior that stands a decent chance of swinging some of the Clinton supporters either into McCain’s camp or into sitting this election out. It’s not Obama doing it, but it’s happening and he’s the ne who’s going to pay the price for it.

Later – and thanks for stopping by!

I don’t want to get into a political argument with a random person on the internet (wait, what else is the internet for again?)… but I will a little anyway. I disclaim first that I’m as clearly partisan here as you are.

For the record, the Obama campaign has also received $10 million in donations… just in the 24 hours since she gave her speech. She’s rallied BOTH bases. The issues McCain has are that A) Obama has a larger base than him, as there are just plain more Democrats than Republicans right now, and B) independents (so far) prefer Obama.

And it’s not sexist to find fault with someone’s credentials or positions. That’s the same fallacy that Clinton fell victim to, and it’s why Obama has NEVER talked about race. Once you say, “Hey, you’re only attacking me because I’m ____!”, you’re making yourself look a lot worse than any attack could. If an attack is truly bigoted, it doesn’t need to be pointed out as such.

Also, what family slurs are those?

Later!
-Ari

Will she bring in any of the independents or the Hillary supporters? That’s still an unknown and I think it will depend a lot on how the Dems attack her. If they keep up with family slurs and the perceived-to-be sexist attacks, then expect Palin to draw in extra votes.

Gotta say that so far, Palin is not working out that well for McCain from a campaign perspective. Her unprecedented lack of major political experience has come under constant attack. And I remain unconvinced she’ll bring any extra voters in – women, for example, overall do not like her, no doubt in part due to her pro-life standpoint, opposing abortion even in cases of rape and incest.

As a side note, her anti-earmark stance is a complete myth. She was well-known (and popular) for bringing in tons of federal dollars to Alaska (and particularly ger small town of Wasilla) specifically through earmarks.

Later,
Ari
http://airtheremin.wordpress.com

Shaping one’s belief, principle and having it shpherded by opinion polls is just brilliant. Brilliantly stupid, that is.