LITTWIN: With conventions over, wild & wacky race begins
By Mike Littwin, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published September 6, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.
Sarah Palin saved John McCain's convention. But the question is: Can she save John McCain's, uh, campaign?
The answer, in any other election, would be, of course, no. Vice-presidential nominees don't determine elections. But this is not any other election. If we've learned anything else this year, we've learned that much.
This is officially the strangest and wildest campaign season in memory - a campaign, as some faithful readers have pointed out, to which only Hunter Thompson himself could have done justice. His line keeps coming to mind: When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
The going is weird, but the pros are having real problems. They've thrown away all the rule books - but not only that, those discarded rule books keep hitting unsuspecting pundits in the face.
The real campaign begins now, and the candidates will go all populist on us, telling voters how much they feel their pain, even as the economic situation continues to worsen. (Brief summary: unemployment spiking, grocery prices rising, 401(k) plans tanking, Harry and Louise needing health care relief. ) It's a much harder pull for McCain, whose basic economic blueprint is to do much of what George Bush has done, which doesn't seem to have worked out all that well to this point.
Obama has it easier. He just has to keep saying that McCain voted with Bush 90 percent of the time - and then sit back as some aide runs the video of Bush and McCain in a manly embrace.
Fortunately for McCain, his campaign is not, at this point, solely about McCain's politics. (Raise your hands out there if you want to keep spending $10 billion a month in Iraq?) The convention made it about McCain's decision to pick Palin, his remaining hold on the old maverick label.
How to explain Sarah Palin?
It seems obvious now. She's the Republican version of Barack Obama, whose worst mistake in the campaign has probably been picking Joe Biden as his running mate. Not because there's anything particularly wrong with Biden, if you don't mind the odd case of plagiarism, but because Biden is completely wrong for this campaign.
The most overworked word this season has been change, but it's exactly the right word when Bush is running at 30 percent in the polls. Biden is not change. Biden is not tomorrow. Biden is competent, but ask Hillary Clinton what competence gets you. Obama made the pick because of worries that voters think he's a risky choice. But McCain doubled down on risk, and, so far, the bet is paying off.
Enter Palin, the underqualifed Palin, the real risk, the Palin who was, in fact, a small-town mayor two years ago, which is not, of course, a knock on small towns. Do you think John Hickenlooper should be president?
I'm sure most voters don't consider Palin ready to be president or vice president or the optimal choice - if they think hard - for a 72-year-old cancer survivor.
But the Republicans needed Palin, someone they'd never heard of, to convince themselves they have a future. I mean, did you watch Mitt Romney? Did you watch Rudy Giuliani? Do you have any questions now about how McCain won the nomination?
Like Obama, Palin offers up an empty slate for her supporters, who get to fill in all the blanks. Palin's appeal is in representing the person that the so-called elites - I've got my card in good standing - supposedly look down on. She's the Wal-Mart mom with five kids and with one of them in trouble. And if Palin herself went to five colleges in six years, none of them remotely Ivy League, that's suddenly a plus.
She's Jimmy Stewart gone to Washington, Lana Turner at a drugstore counter. She gives a speech saying to her doubters in the press: "Now here's a little news flash for those reporters and commentators: I'm not going to Washington to seek their good opinion." Imagine John McCain, who once called the media elite his base, trying to say that with a straight face.
When the unknown Palin arrived on the scene, McCain campaign advisers cried sexism as soon as the press started asking tough questions about her. It's funny, of course, Republicans being the party officially opposed to victimhood and identity politics. For them to complain about sexism seemed a lot like the wolf complaining about sheepism.
But this wasn't about sexism, really. Palin's appeal is based on class.
No one can know whether she's truly a star in the making or a shooting star. She has been on the scene for about a week. The Obama people are sending out a story from The Hill about Palin's refusal so far to say whether she's supporting the re-election bid of indicted-for-corruption Sen. Ted Stevens. Meanwhile, The Anchorage Daily News has an editorial up about Palin stalling on Trooper-gate. Palin hasn't yet taken questions from the press or debated Biden.
There's more to come. But the advice for Obama on how to take on Palin is pretty universal - he shouldn't.
He runs against McCain - not Palin - and against McCain's seven houses and his $500 shoes and, mostly, against his embrace of George Bush economics. Obama is a slight favorite now, and that's before the debates, in which he'll be a heavy favorite.
Here's the election as the image-makers want you to see it: Republicans imagine a photo of McCain raising Palin's hand in triumph. Democrats want the picture to be of Bush hanging as an albatross around McCain's neck.
Either way, as a Coloradan and a citizen of a battleground state, you'll get to watch it all play out. You know what to do: Pay attention to the issues - and make sure the mute button works on the remote.
Featured
-
DNC in Denver
Complete coverage of the 2008 Democratic National Convention.
-
The Crevasse
A five-part series that examines one tragic day on Mount Rainier.
-
Deadly denial
Sick nuclear workers applied for government compensation but most haven't seen a dime.
-
Final Salute
The Rocky followed Maj. Steve Beck as he took on the most difficult duty of his career.
-
'Colorado's burning'
Coverage of the state's worst wildfires.
-
Columbine shootings
Coverage of the April 20, 1999, shootings at Littleton's Columbine High School.
-
The Crossing
Colorado's deadliest traffic accident killed 20 children on Dec. 14, 1961.
-
Osveli's journey
Osveli Sales left Guatemala for a better life. Two months later, he came home in a box.
-
Wake for an Indian warrior
Oglala Sioux bestow a tribute to the first tribal fatality in Iraq.
September 6, 2008
6:48 a.m.
vudumom writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
September 6, 2008
8:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
dilligaf writes:
vudumom writes:
"Sarah Palin had better ratings than Obama's rock concert.
John McCain's speech had more viewers than Obama's speech.
You and your biased buddies keep on being fluffers for Obama. You are helping John McCain's campaign. The American citizen's have always loved an underdog."
Again another blowhole telling lies. Obama broke a record with 38 million viewers. Can you give us your source where you got these stat's? I know I saw 85,000 people jammed into Investco seeing Obama.
September 6, 2008
8:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
T1anda writes:
According to CNN McCain had 40 million viewers watching. Gads don't people EVER say anything without reverting to name calling and ad hominum attacks? It gets real old ya know?
BTW Joe Biden is 65 years old and has been a victim of two brain aneurisms(sp.) He has been a leader in the tiny state of Delaware. Compare that with the large state and population of Alaska. Plus, Biden, Obama, and McCain have no executive experience what so ever. At least Palin can claim two years more experience than any of the other three nominees.
Littwin I am an unafilliated voter. I agree with the Democrats on some issues and I agree with the Repubs on some issues. I have been researching and have been paying great attention to these issues! Neither McCain nor Obama really qualify for President in my opinion..BUT, Obama leans to far left and his past associates and questionable wife make me very sure that I will be voting for McCain. BTW I am agnostic.
It would certainly be nice, some year to vote FOR a nominee instead of voting for the lesser of two evils!
September 6, 2008
10:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
David_R writes:
I realize that Littwin is an opinion columnist. Granting that, one would hope that he would stick to facts and not rely on half truths and spun assertions to fabricate "facts" to support his predisposed conclusions.
There's still a lot that needs to be known about Palin before she can be considered a legitimate candidate. However, spin stories such as this threaten to undermine any fact based reports on her abilities or lack thereof. Think of the story about the boy who cried wolf too many times.
This story was spun worse than the Obama camp has provided. At least they are dealing with facts (publicly) and calling into question factual decisions, not speculated conclusions.
Or, is this an unofficial position being worked by the Obama campaign --encouraging fabricated stories like this and the one out of Miami connecting Palin to Nazi's?
It's almost ironic that the more of these half truth attacks that come out of journalistic sources (and I use that term loosely), the more the average person is drawn to defend or support Palin as one of their own. It would be a shame if the media drives votes to the McCain-Palin ticket due to their hypocrisy and not let the election be decided by voters based on the issues.
At least you never disappoint me, Mike. When you don't expect anything of substance or truth from a columnist, you're not disappointed when none is proffered.
September 6, 2008
10:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
Allseasonsfan writes:
dilligaf - both McCain and Palin had 40 million viewers with less network coverage. And 85,000 people did not see Obama at Invesco. 5,000 had seats behind the temple and the sound booth. They had to watch on the scoreboard. These were supposed to be prime seats to loyal followers. I guess loyalty is a one way street with the Obama campaign. Oh and the caring, compassionate dems forgot about people with special needs at Invesco and in the words of the person who was supposed to take care of "their" needs, "I'm tired of this and I just want to go home".
Here is the other difference between the two, go into their websites. You have to sign up and give an email address to get into Obamas. McCain you do not. That is how their administrations will work too.
September 6, 2008
10:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
KenB writes:
I had heard that Sarah Palin's church's pastor's sermons were available online at the church's website. I also heard that the website was scrubbed of those sermons just the day before her selection was announced.
I checked with www.archive.org, where you can use the "Wayback Machine" to view websites as they were on specific dates in the past. Surprise, surprise, the Wayback Machine has been scrubbed as well. You see a lot of dates when you should be able to view the website on that date but when you click on the links you get an error message. Obama had his minister problems, and it looks like Palin has her minister problems as well, except that they're trying to hide what he preaches.
Why does this not inspire confidence in me?
September 6, 2008
2:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
mcsame_failin writes:
LOOK AT THE CANDIDATE CLOSELY BEFORE DECIDING YOUR VOTE! and I don't mean her figure or pretty face (if that's your taste).
From http://tinyurl.com/5kw8ch:
and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhgUvX...
"The McCain campaign has admitted to a ban on most press interviews for its largely unknown but popular running mate. McCain's aides are selling this highly unusual approach with rank contempt for the public. "Who cares?" laughed Nicolle Wallace, when pressed on why Palin won't take questions by Time's Jay Carney, on MSNBC. "But I mean, like, from who, from you?" she added, incredulous at the very idea of Palin taking questions from Time's Washington bureau chief. "Who cares? No offense," she added, "who cares if she can talk to Time magazine?""
This sounds like a quote from Zoolander, "Lucky for me no one I know reads your little TIME magazine or whatever its called", hahahaha, boy does Nicolle Wallace sound stupid. And she is a press aide to McCain. Proof of another unwise choice by McCain.
"Ultimately, with proper coverage and pressure, voters can make a judgment about what Palin's actions as a candidate tell us about her character. She talks tough about reporters, but can't face them; she talks up government ethics, but won't answer an investigation under oath; she raves about her own pit-bull image on stage, but betrays a cowardice under actual pressure. In some ways, she is living out the very caricature that she drew of Obama last week -- all talk, no action -- coupled with the smug attitude of her predecessor, the sarcastic swagger and faux-populism of George W. Bush."
Come on people, don't let the Rovian spin doctors deceive you. Read the news paper, and maybe even "TIME magazine or whatever it is called". Your vote is a constitutional right and responsibility to do the due diligence and make an INFORMED decision, not base your vote on a cute joke about hockey moms and pit-bulls!
September 6, 2008
2:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
HolierThanThou writes:
Conservative Christians like Sarah Palin believe in a myth called Armageddon, which states that the end of the world is near. While there are variations on this myth, they all assume that Jesus and God will show up after we destroy the Earth. Then they'll fix our mess and make it all better.
If we allow these lunatics to proceed with this supposed plan from God, we are likely to be disappointed with the final result.
I don't recommend giving the launch codes to anyone who has the mentality of Sarah Palin. She's proven to be one vindictive little criminal once she gets her hands on some power. As governor, she fired the Alaska State Police Chief for refusing to fire her former brother-in-law. So, she's already proven to be corrupt.
What's worse is that, unlike the present batch of conservatives whose corruption is profit-driven, hers can be drawn out by a bad mood and evil intentions without the need to justify it by expectations of personal gain for taking the risk. As perverse as that sounds, it puts her well into the category of one who is beyond ordinary criminality and well into the realm of the insane.
While we can tolerate such character defects on the local level, we need to remember that the president can launch a nuclear attack and destroy the world. It would be an awful waste to let that happen over a hissy fit.
September 6, 2008
3:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
goodspkr writes:
mcsame_failin writes: mostly nonsense.
The press has shown it's true colors so doing some shielding of Sarah Palin is a good campaign strategy. The NYT had three front page stories on August 29th about Bristol Palin. We've had female liberal columnists show themselves to be sexists hypocrites as they question whether or not she should run for the VP since she has "small children" at home. I've seen stories online charging that Sarah Palin cut back funding for pregnant teenagers (she hadn't) and wants to put intelligent design in the schools (she doesn't). One conservative said he had people in his office who have heard of Bristol Palin and her pregnancy, but have never heard of Rev Wright, Bill Ayers, etc. The MSM seems to feel it's okay not to look into John Edwards affair and love child, not to report on Bill Ayers' relationship with BHO, and I didn't see a slew of stories talking about Biden's plagiarism scandal or how often he was against the things that seem to work in defeating the USSR.
The MSM is acting like the judges did at the 1972 Olympics when America lost it's first ever basketball game. They had to give the Russians three tries after time had run out, but R. William Jones, secretary general of FIBA, was quoted later as saying, "The Americans have to learn how to lose."
But the reality is that McCain made a brilliant pick for VP while Obama fumbled his. Sarah Palin is the left's worst nightmare, and intelligent, conservative woman with real values which she not only embraces, but practices. And to paraphrase Jones "The American left has to be prepared to lose."
September 6, 2008
3:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
goodspkr writes:
HolierThanThou writes and makes sure we understand he is a complete fool:
Conservative Christians like Sarah Palin believe in a myth called Armageddon, which states that the end of the world is near. While there are variations on this myth, they all assume that Jesus and God will show up after we destroy the Earth. Then they'll fix our mess and make it all better.
If we allow these lunatics to proceed with this supposed plan from God, we are likely to be disappointed with the final result.
I don't recommend giving the launch codes to anyone who has the mentality of Sarah Palin. She's proven to be one vindictive little criminal once she gets her hands on some power.
Goodspkr responds:
Hmmm, HTT. Exactly what law has Sarah Palin broken? It's amazing to me that people make charges like this with absolutely no idea of what they are talking about. First of all, she fired the Public Safety Commissioner. Now this is completely within her power since this job serves at her pleasure hence no law was or could have been broken.
You seem to like to throw around words like insane. I guess you feel you are an expert in this because your letter certainly looks like someone who suffers from it.
September 6, 2008
4:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
rip84 writes:
goodspkr:
Your response to Holierthanthou identifies a weakness in your life philosophy. While Palin may be within her rights as a governor to fire whomever she wants and look at confidential files, it does not mean it is ethical. Clearly, you are someone who believes that law is a higher standard than ethics and not vice versa. I suspect you are the type of individual who thinks it is OK for an 40 year old to have sex with an 18 year old because it is lawful. Good luck answering to the good lord on that one.
September 6, 2008
6:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
me2 writes:
Her husband is a secessionist, he wants them to be king and queen of the United Counties of Alaska.
George Carlin, are you getting this?
September 6, 2008
7:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
dftoad writes:
I agree and disagree with Mike. Time will tell what kind of a star Gov. Palin turns out to be. We've long accepted one-term or first term Governors as generally more qualified than all but the most senior senators. That because a first term Governor does more in his or her first couple of years (budgets, appointments, policy goals etc.) than Senators do in their first couple of terms. (Senators Talk, Governors Do.)
The seniors, like Biden, do run powerful committees, get secret briefings etc.
It's for that reason, I expect McCain to best Obama in at least two of the three debates. (Three of four if you count Saddleback) Obama is an excellent teleprompter performer, but example of his thinking on his feet are few and far in between. (The Democratic debates were not very challenging. See the Atlantic Magazine analysis).
McCain has doubled-down on his maverick brand with Gov. Palin. Time will tell.
September 6, 2008
8:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
HolierThanThou writes:
Sarah Palin is being investigated for improperly dismissing the boss of her former brother-in-law. She ordered him to fire her brother-in-law because he was in a custody dispute with his ex-wife, her sister. He refused, so she fired him.
That kind of behavior is not an acceptable standard for someone running a medium-sized company much less our entire country. It is also illegal in most civilized governments to dismiss people without just cause. It's called cronyism. But perhaps that kind of unethical conduct is perfectly legal in Alaska. Evidently, that is the only lame excuse that my detractors can fabricate.
I find it noteworthy that no dispute was presented for the much worse problem of her being a religious nut. Believers in Armageddon are not dangerous when left to their own churches and devices. The device that needs to remain separate from their visions of global domination or destruction are those of the nuclear variety.
Sarah Palin doesn't need me to criticize her. The fact that her church is obfuscating its most cherished and dangerous teachings speaks for itself. The fact that her own decisions as governor prove her to be vindictive and petty demonstrate that she is an avid tyrant. These two facts taken together constitute an ominous threat to the safety and well-being of America and the world.
The last decade with Bush was mortifying enough. But his nonsense was driven by the profit motive. Nobody who has any awareness of the facts of the McCain/Palin ticket would seriously want those two so close to the machinery of global destruction. America needs sane leadership and we need it now.
September 6, 2008
9:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
diamondstay writes:
You Democrates are all crying that you don't know about Palin. Well, the country already knows all they need to know about the Republican ticket. After the Democrate's extravaganza in Denver, the Republicans stole the show with Palin. Obviously the Republicans are a lot smarter than the Democrates. Read'em and weep! All your whinning about not knowing about Palin isn't going to influence the electorate. Palin's got the family issues the country can associate with and she's too smart for the dirty tricks the Democrates are trying play on her.
September 6, 2008
10:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
BO writes:
diamondstay-
"Obviously the Republicans are a lot smarter than the Democrates."
I would be willing to bet that most Democrats know how to spell Democrats. Mess up spelling something once, it is a typo- twice, it is ignorance.
September 7, 2008
8:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
Sensible writes:
McCain and Palin knocked the libs out of the park!
Goodbye libs.
We will not miss you.
September 7, 2008
8:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Sensible writes:
BO -
you stink.
September 7, 2008
7:13 p.m.
rjnova writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
September 8, 2008
9:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
JYP3500 writes:
Mike, when you made the attacks against Palin personal, you lost any remaining credibility with the silent majority. They will come out in droves to vote in November.
And what you are conveniently not telling folks is...half of those new energized Democratic voters supported Hillary, most of whom will now automatically support Palin.
Just curious...when will you play the race card? Will it be when Barack falls really far behind in the polls? Or when/if he loses the election?
September 8, 2008
11:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
Don_Lopez writes:
Remember the mocking tone Mr. Littwin used when addressing all things McCain?
Remember the disdain he used when talking about the chances of the Surge succeeding?
Those days are gone.
They’ve been replaced by a somewhat different tone as Mr. Littwin sees Senator Obama’s poll numbers changing and he finds himself no longer able to cavalierly brush aside the prospect of a John McCain presidency.
Mr. Littwin has covered sports long enough to recognize the symptoms: his throat is getting dry, very dry, and his palms are sweaty. He’s starting to feel like Senator Clinton did when she realized her dreams were evaporating right before her eyes.
Things are changing and isn’t that appropriate since change is what Mr. Littwin claims to support.
September 8, 2008
3:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
SteveT8 writes:
Sarah Palin is the Republican version of Barack Obama? Not hardly. A Republican version of Barack Obama would be someone who worked for five years with an abortion clinic bomber, launched his political career from the bomber's home, and then claimed they just lived in the same neighborhood. It would be someone who attended Ku Klux Klan meetings for over twenty years and then said he never heard any racist talk in those meetings. For those who don't understand the comparisons I'm making, you need to learn about Obama's relationships with terrorist William Ayers and the church of Jeremiah Wright.
September 11, 2008
12:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
BJG writes:
Mikey: First of all her 17 year old daughter didn't "get in trouble" she is pregnant and as far as I know, it still takes two to have that happen.
As a woman, I do not share Sarah Palin's ideoligies. Actually the Republicans should be ashamed to have picked someone so unqualified and unaware. McCain, I understand, wanted either Lieberman or Tom Ridge but the republican party elders said no to his selections. So instead he picked a sure loser in Sarah Palin. I'm sure McCain is as surprised at her popularity as the Dems are.