Since we've had some time to digest the Palin pick and think it over some (though I am still shocked), here are some more quick-hit thoughts on McCain-Palin.
(1) Democrats must tread carefully. A first instinct for many -- myself included -- was to savage this choice because of Palin's utter lack of experience or qualifications for the job, McCain's hypocrisy given his attacks on Obama for being inexperienced, and other areas. I've calmed down some. Clearly, Democrats will need to attack Palin, but they will need to be methodical and careful about it. They can't engage in behavior that might seem like they are ganging up on Palin. Case in point: the veep debate. That Biden will be shockingly more skilled, knowledgeable and qualified Palin is the precisely the reason to be careful. Biden will need to go into the debate, and carefully take Palin apart. Given the stakes involved, Dems should not underestimate Palin.
(2) Democrats should focus on Palin's extremism first, then her lack of qualifications. The first instinct is to look at Palin's resume, mouth agape, and wonder how in God's name anyone could be nominated to be Vice President with such thin qualifications. However, I think Democrats must set out to define Palin as an extremist before focusing on her lack of qualifications. Bashing her lack of experience right off the bat is tricky, and it could be more open to criticism. Indeed, had McCain tapped Tim Pawlenty or even Mitt Romney, the natural response for Palin would be that she possesses nearly as much if not equal political experience as either man, and that as a woman, people are unfairly focusing on qualifications. It would be much harder to respond to extremist attacks. Palin is against abortion in all cases, she opposes the use of birth control even for married couples, she is currently suing the Bush administration to keep the polar bear from being listed as a threatened species, she wants to teach creationism in school, and she is opposed to stem cell research. If Democrats can define Palin as an extremist early, they can then move onto experience, making a lethal one-two punch.
(3) Attacking Palin as grossly inexperienced can be exploited to also blast McCain as a hypocrite. As we discussed yesterday, Palin might be the least qualified person on a national ticket in modern, if not all history. This is a huge liability, and one that could resonate. Going further, if properly executed, these attacks could implicate McCain too. McCain has based the very premise of his campaign that Obama is not ready to lead because of lack of experience. Picking Palin smacks of rank, almost breath-taking hypocrisy, and McCain is wide open to the attack. Democrats need to make McCain's life hard immediately on this score, and let him try to execute a quick pivot.
(4) Democrats should also consider a broad attack that Palin's nomination is dangerous, and one made purely for political expediency. Given the historic nature of the choice, this line of attack is also tricky, but it would fit into any broad offensive against McCain. You can call me overly political here, but I think this issue goes beyond politics. Having Sarah Palin as the veep for a 72-year old who has had numerous health scares is plainly dangerous. She has almost no qualifications to be commander and chief of this country, all the garbage of her heading the Alaska National Guard aside. It is a dangerous proposition, and in my opinion, for all his posturing of being the best man to protect America, McCain has clearly made a political move that could actually threaten this country should he win. McCain likely thinks that he is in fine health, and nothing is likely to happen to him, but who can ever predict the future? Tapping Palin is a political move, and Palin would be plainly unqualified to be President.
(5) I am not as nervous about Palin attracting female voters and HRC supporters. Clearly, the number one motivation behind this pick was attracting increased swaths of the female electorate, and perhaps even lots of bitter Hillary supporters. Every other consideration, like pumping up conservatives and evangelicals, while important, is secondary. This top aim may well come to fruition, but I am not as fearful of it as I was yesterday.
There are several reasons for this change of heart. First, I never really considered the potential for backlash from women; in other words, I think it was foolish to even accept as a given that female voters would flock to McCain because of his tapping Palin. A lot of women might well take this as insulting, and the very early polling seems to confirm this. Second, when many women, especially those who were supporting or attached to Clinton, learn of Palin's extremely conservative and evangelical-pleasing views, many of them will turn away from the GOP ticket in disgust. Opposing the use of contraceptives is the not the way to win many female voters, especially those on the fence and are not already predisposed to vote Republican anyway.
(6) Republicans are already over-stating Palin's value. Yesterday, when Obama's spokesman assailed the Palin pick, mentioning that less than two years ago Pail was mayor of Wasilla, a town of 9,000, Republicans pounced, arguing that this background will help Palin make inroads with small-town voters, independents, and voters in places like central Pennsylvania, and Ohio, to name a couple. Perhaps Palin will make good inroads with these segments of the electorate, but if so, it will be on other grounds; that Palin is from small-town Alaska is almost absolutely irrelevant to this type of outreach. Just because someone is from a small town does not make it likely that anyone else in a small town elsewhere will back that person for the second-highest office there is. Furthermore, even if small town Americans like this part of Palin's background, it does not follow that all or even many of them want a small town politician with no experience to be a step away from the presidency. This argument is wishful thinking by Republicans, and nonsense in this author's opinion.
(7) This pick could be a game-changer, but in a unique way: by turning this election into a referendum on social wedge issues. This is an interesting issue, and one that was kind of overlooked initially. Up to this point, the underlying key issue in this election has been the economy. With Palin's strongly outspoken conservative views now coming into focus, there is a good possibility that the same social issues that have been largely off the table this cycle -- but always under the proverbial surface -- will take a more central role, and this is something Republicans may invite.
With the economy encountered a score of problems right now, Republicans might welcome the opportunity to turn this election into one on abortion, stem cell research, and gun rights. This is certainly familiar terrain to national Republicans: they have excelled for years in turning elections on wedge affairs. It is through this time-and-tested approach that they have adeptly cobbled together majorities in key elections, and with an environment as anti-GOP as this one, it might be a better option than running on the economy and the Iraq war. This tact would certainly please the base, and it is apparent that the base is delighted with Palin for these very reasons. Now, whether or not this type of field would ultimately result in a McCain victory is another story entirely -- as it is unclear that many moderate and conservative minded independents will vote on social issues this year with every thing else going on -- but the pick certainly creates the potential for this scenario, and it is worth watching.
(8) Palin won't be a game-changer in the Alaska Senate and House races. When Palin was announced, one of views was that having her on the ticket would save the endangered House and Senate seats up in Alaska this November. While Palin's name on the top of the ballot will undoubtedly help Republicans hold both seats, it is not a game-changer. There are important reasons for this.
In terms of the Senate seat, what happens will depend on Sen. Stevens' impending corruption trial. Should he be convicted, he will almost certainly lose, Palin or no Palin. An acquittal before November 4 would obviously bolster the Senator's chances. The House seat is more complicated, as the primary outcome is still in doubt. Should Don Young go on to win, he has been down double-digits in general election polls for months. Furthermore, like with Stevens, Palin has been a bitter critic and enemy of the longtime incumbent, which will certainly weigh on voters; in other words, Palin's candidacy is in no way an endorsement of Young. Palin recruited her Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell to run against Young! Now, if Parnell comes out ahead on the absentee ballots (an eventually we've calculated is not a given), he would get a big boast from Palin. But this may not even happen.
(9) The gloves are going to have to come off eventually. Since the big news, Sen. Obama has been entirely complimentary of Palin (he even repremanded his spokesman's early attack on Palin), as has Clinton, though she did take a jab at the choice. This is both smart and entirely expected. It would be foolish for the big Democratic guns themselves to savage the pick on day one. However, once things have settled, the Obama campaign, Hillary, and especially Obama will need to take the gloves off (to varying degrees, of course), and tear the bark off of, McCain-Palin.
In sum, with both men down double digits in their contests, even Palin would have a hard to time delivering victories to save the seats. But don't count out the possibility either.
I'm sure we will have more thoughts on McCain-Palin in the coming weeks and months. To be honest, I am still stunned that it happened!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment