The other evening, I was on my way home from work and was listening to a local conservative talk radio show. The questions on the board were:
1) In which direction should the GOP be heading?
2) Why has the GOP thrown Palin under the bus?
Of course, the answer to the second question is easy; the party took a long look at Madame Governor and saw Dan Quayle.
She is a moron with a great smile. The first query, however...
I initially theorized that the GOP, if it wanted to do well, needed to run a candidate who "connected" with the public at large. Over the past 30 years, successful bidders for the presidency have had that quality. Upon reflection, however, I changed that opinion. Certainly that opinion is supported by a measure of hindsight, but I can find no flaw, though I would welcome your comments on this:
McCain spent a good deal of time talking about being a 'maverick' and wanting to reach across the aisle in the 'spirit of bipartisanship' Saying it is easy. I feel if McCain truly believed in these principles, he could have best demonstrated that commitment by tapping Hillary Clinton as his running mate.
Now after the cries of outrage cease...
This works for many reasons, but I will limit my dissertation to two. First, Ms Clinton has a great deal of power in the Senate. He strength as a political ally would be immeasurable to any President.
Second, the time for partisan politics is over. We need to be united as a nation to face down these crises we are facing. What better face to give the nation that a presidential team that represents both parties, and therefore the entire country?
Had this happened, I believe that McCain could have taken this election...not that I wanted that; I am 100% Green Party, and supported Obama.
CD Sutton II
with the scenario of a McCain-Clinton ticket would be that Clinton and McCain differ on to many issues. Hard core conservatives would have felt betrayed, and not bothered to vote. This is assuming that Clinton agreed to run with McCain. Obama would have won by an even bigger margin.
"when you hold a pen, you are at war" Attributed to Voltaire
Certainly...initially. Upon reflection and consideration, however, I believe that team would have found a measure of acceptance in both parties. As I said, it's one thing to preach bipartisanship, quite another to practice it. Think about it...a chance for both parties to be equally represented; not just in the Senate or House, but at the highest level of our government. And, though I hate to admit it, the portion of our citizenry who bailed on the left after Obama won the nomination would have had a better reason to vote for McCain. Palin certainly did not provide one.
Best Regards
Chuckhoek