Why do you hate Sarah Palin?

[Netzach]

I thought of you when I saw the following at fivethirtyeight.



"But what's going on with Minnesota -- where SurveyUSA actually gives McCain a one-point lead?

The poll may be a mild outlier. SurveyUSA has generally shown more favorable numbers for John McCain in Minnesota than other agencies that have surveyed the state. But they aren't the only pollster to come up with numbers like this; Quinnipiac and the Star Tribune also show Minnesota close, although CNN and Rasmussen don't.

Markos Moulitsas has data on advertising expenditures that may explain the difference. Overall, in the week ended 9/30, Obama spent about 2.5x as much as John McCain on advertising. This is likely an underappreciated reason behind his recent polling surge. But in Minnesota, McCain outadvertised Obama better than 3:1. In fact, Minnesota was the only state in the entire country where McCain out-advertised Obama.

So McCain may literally have bought his way into a competitive race in Minnesota. It now rates as the 7th most important state in the election according to our tipping point metric, behind the traditional Big Three (Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida), the New Two (Colorado, Virginia), and Michigan, which should probably now be scratched off the list.

It hasn't come cheaply, however, as McCain has now spent tens of millions of dollars on the state -- money that didn't go into Florida, or North Carolina, or Indiana, or Virginia, where Obama has had the advertising edge, and where the McCain campaign is now on its heels. Those are also resources that didn't go into Michigan, where McCain has withdrawn from.

So, yes, you can beat a state into submission if you really want to -- I mean, if Obama decided he really wanted to win South Dakota, he could probably do so. But whether it's been a good use of resources, we will have to see. In certain ways, this is starting to remind one a lot of the Herschel Walker trade. And Obama campaign is not exactly unready, leading McCain in field offices in Minnesota 28 to 9."

What no one seems to be bringing up is this - I looked at the poll. The affiliates were Rochester (red) Alexandria (red) and Duluth (blue, this is the only one the concerns me. I'd send Biden out there, Obama isn't going to sway the rust belt racially unsure union vote)

The strategy has been to be on the ground here entirely. Good strategy, but...

Coleman's outspending Franken like nuts on TV and it's paying off. Though again, it's going to be really really close. Like Pawlenty/Hatch close. To say we're GOP and turning red with these pussy hair close wins over very liberal opposition is to gloss over a serious 50/50 split, and a liking for third parties.

One thing about MN is true - we don't do what we're "supposed to." In Bush/Kerry one of the MN electoral votes went to - JOHN EDWARDS.

BO has GOT to capture the independents here. If he can grab a share of those we'll be solidly blue.

And Survey USA results are crackhead results in other ways. They have McCain up among under 65 and down among seniors? HUH?

I know we're a fairly white state, but they only found 19 black people to take this poll. Guess they don't want to venture into Camden.

 

[JMohegan]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20081003/us_time/whysomewomenhatesarahpalin

She agrees. Only pretty girls like pretty girls.


And they are Mean Girls

"Here's why Palin doesn't make the grade:

1. She's too pretty. This is very bad news. At school, pretty girls tend to be liked only by other pretty girls. The rest of us, whose looks hover somewhere around underwhelming, resent them and whisper archly of their "unearned attention." So, if everyone calls your candidate "hot," you're in a whole mess of trouble."



I'd say the author at your link misses the point. It's not that she's too pretty, it's that she deliberately, overtly, actively uses her attractiveness to try to win something she hasn't earned.

Wink, flirty smile, wink. In a vice presidential debate. Women who've been passed over by less-qualified but more attractive females resent that type of behavior. With good reason, they resent it a lot. And CM is not alone in finding it inappropriate and offensive, simply in terms of professional conduct standards.

My suspicion is that in the debate, Palin went too far. Sure, there'll be some men out there thinking with their cocks. But not all men are so easily played. And women? I think a lot of women are becoming increasingly disgusted with this candidate.

 

[Netzach]

"Here's why Palin doesn't make the grade:

1. She's too pretty. This is very bad news. At school, pretty girls tend to be liked only by other pretty girls. The rest of us, whose looks hover somewhere around underwhelming, resent them and whisper archly of their "unearned attention." So, if everyone calls your candidate "hot," you're in a whole mess of trouble."



I'd say the author at your link misses the point. It's not that she's too pretty, it's that she deliberately, overtly, actively uses her attractiveness to try to win something she hasn't earned.

Wink, flirty smile, wink. In a vice presidential debate. Women who've been passed over by less-qualified but more attractive females resent that type of behavior. With good reason, they resent it a lot. And CM is not alone in finding it inappropriate and offensive, simply in terms of professional conduct standards.

My suspicion is that in the debate, Palin went too far. Sure, there'll be some men out there thinking with their cocks. But not all men are so easily played. And women? I think a lot of women are becoming increasingly disgusted with this candidate.

I think I clean up pretty good with makeup and lighting. I mean I may not be as hot to an RNC member as an adolescent boy or Sarah Palin, but believe me, her alleged hotness is not what I've got issue with.

 

[JMohegan]

What no one seems to be bringing up is this - I looked at the poll. The affiliates were Rochester (red) Alexandria (red) and Duluth (blue, this is the only one the concerns me. I'd send Biden out there, Obama isn't going to sway the rust belt racially unsure union vote)

The strategy has been to be on the ground here entirely. Good strategy, but...

Coleman's outspending Franken like nuts on TV and it's paying off. Though again, it's going to be really really close. Like Pawlenty/Hatch close. To say we're GOP and turning red with these pussy hair close wins over very liberal opposition is to gloss over a serious 50/50 split, and a liking for third parties.

One thing about MN is true - we don't do what we're "supposed to." In Bush/Kerry one of the MN electoral votes went to - JOHN EDWARDS.

BO has GOT to capture the independents here. If he can grab a share of those we'll be solidly blue.

And Survey USA results are crackhead results in other ways. They have McCain up among under 65 and down among seniors? HUH?

I know we're a fairly white state, but they only found 19 black people to take this poll. Guess they don't want to venture into Camden.

That's interesting. And weird!

Were Barr and Nader included in the poll?

This is something I've been wondering. Since people are so pissed off over the bailout thing, how many will vote third party? And who will that benefit more - McCain, or Obama?

 

[Netzach]

post dysfunction

 

[Netzach]

That's interesting. And weird!

Were Barr and Nader included in the poll?

This is something I've been wondering. Since people are so pissed off over the bailout thing, how many will vote third party? And who will that benefit more - McCain, or Obama?

I'm a little hazy on it, I took a glance into it.

I know there are going to be third party votes here and dropouts. Very libertarian leaning kind of place. Very Bluecon. (social issues blue, fiscal issues red)

Remember we'd rather have things fall on us than raise taxes.

Sarah Palin plays well in the places that sound like her. She's like Michelle Bachman's more socially skilled sister.

However:

McCain is NOT energizing anyone to fever pitch. A lot of those Bluecon votes will go to Barr and sit home. They don't blame him LESS than Obama.

Just checked it out - looks like it's NOT in the poll, but people are weighing in. I think you HAVE to put third parties to know what's going on in MN, always. We love 'em.

"Complicating this analysis is the emergence of a possible protest vote. 12% of Independents, 8% of young voters, 6% of men, 6% of those who almost never go to church, 5% of Conservatives and 5% of Twin Cities voters tell SurveyUSA that they will vote for neither McCain nor Obama, but rather “some other candidate.”

Remember if they had "Barr" or "write in" as options (I am SURE there will be Ron Paul write-ins) this would look different. I know it.

 

[Netzach]

Someone asked me, if she were the Democratic candidate, if nothing about her were different except her positions on the issues lined up with yours, would you trash talk her like that?

I can honestly say I would be appalled and have a lot of lip biting and hard swallowing to do to get out and vote my ticket and I'd be thinking Obama insane.
She would be a source of embarrassment to me and anger, as a woman being served up this offensive, deeply offensive kool aid by my party. I would be calling for her to be dropped. Appalled. Yes.

 

[intothewoods]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20081003/us_time/whysomewomenhatesarahpalin

She agrees. Only pretty girls like pretty girls.


And they are Mean Girls

Thanks, expert Belinda Lupscomb.

I dooon't think so.

Women have different reasons for hating her. I doubt the fact that she's pretty ranks high up there. She's not, like, ice-queen beautiful. She's cute, she's approachable, she's girl next door hot.

Amongst liberal women, the sentiment is that she supports anti-female policies. I don't really get into the personal disdain thing, but to the extent I do with Palin, it was her nasty tone at the RNC. And pretending she actually she gave a shit about feminism and the glass ceiling. Puh-lease. I thought she seemed much nicer at the debate, but it was like a caricature of a hockey mom. I don't really know who the real Palin is, and I don't care.

I've heard women friends of mine call her a bitch. That she doesn't inspire or lead with honor, just nastiness. Not really meaningful to me, but it's a sentiment that's out there. Many women don't like that she's not spending more time with her newborn. I've heard that too.

I don't know that women are all that different from men on getting into the personality of a candidate. It's possible that women react on a more personal level, but there are certainly plenty of men who like the guy they feel they could have a beer with.

 

[Sir_Winston54]

Doing it right the first would probably involve occupying Iraq from 1991 to at least 2001 if not longer. You want to think that one through again?

My definition of doing it right the first time would have been not stopping when we did, but going in and taking Saddam out, then getting the hell out and letting them sort out their own damn problems.

In effect, we would have gone in to excise a boil, administer some antibiotics (help them set up at least a semi-reasonable temporary reorganization government), and discharge them from the ER.

Instead, in 1991, we treated one small symptom (the occupation of Kuwait) and just let the disease run rampant until, when we went in again, we had to not only cure the disease (take Saddam and his cohorts out), but amputate substantial parts of the (political) body, and hang around to give them huge amounts of therapy to learn how to deal with their new situation.

IMO, had we done it that way in '91, instead of going in with the extremely limited goals we had, we would likely have been there another six months to a year - not ten more years.

 

[Netzach]

My definition of doing it right the first time would have been not stopping when we did, but going in and taking Saddam out, then getting the hell out and letting them sort out their own damn problems.

In effect, we would have gone in to excise a boil, administer some antibiotics (help them set up at least a semi-reasonable temporary reorganization government), and discharge them from the ER.

Instead, in 1991, we treated one small symptom (the occupation of Kuwait) and just let the disease run rampant until, when we went in again, we had to not only cure the disease (take Saddam and his cohorts out), but amputate substantial parts of the (political) body, and hang around to give them huge amounts of therapy to learn how to deal with their new situation.

IMO, had we done it that way in '91, instead of going in with the extremely limited goals we had, we would likely have been there another six months to a year - not ten more years.

Oh man. Destabilize and run? You do realize why Afghanistan is Afghanistan, don't you?

Weren't we still just a little worried about Russian influence on the entire region at that point?

Maybe by not building Godzilla in the first place things would look different, but that's the problem with interventionist policy and hindsight. You don't know how far back you have to roll things to figure out where it went wrong.

 

[JMohegan]

Someone asked me, if she were the Democratic candidate, if nothing about her were different except her positions on the issues lined up with yours, would you trash talk her like that?

I can honestly say I would be appalled and have a lot of lip biting and hard swallowing to do to get out and vote my ticket and I'd be thinking Obama insane.
She would be a source of embarrassment to me and anger, as a woman being served up this offensive, deeply offensive kool aid by my party. I would be calling for her to be dropped. Appalled. Yes.

Uh - pardon? Trash talking? Trash talking?

I've got a better question. Why is it that most people said absolutely NOTHING when so many spent so much time insulting Hilary Clinton's physical appearance, incessantly calling her a bitch, and picketing her rallies with signs that said Iron My Shirt?

Can someone explain this to me, please? What the fuck is wrong with CutieMouse making the perfectly rational and professional observation that winking and flirting is inappropriate in a VP debate context? What the fuck is wrong with BeachGurl pointing out that a double standard applied to Palin's lies exposes serious inadequacies in terms of her intelligence and/or preparedness? What the fuck is wrong with you reminding everybody of the oft-ignored fact that Palin's under investigation for abuse of power in her own freakin' state? What the fuck is wrong with Fury pointing out that she's a puppet, when nearly everything that comes out of her mouth is word-for-word recitation of verbiage she's been instructed to say?

Really. What the fuck?

Since when did legitimate objection become trash talking? And where the HELL were all these overly protective wannabe censors when HRC was being skewered on a daily basis?

 

[Netzach]

Uh - pardon? Trash talking? Trash talking?

I've got a better question. Why is it that most people said absolutely NOTHING when so many spent so much time insulting Hilary Clinton's physical appearance, incessantly calling her a bitch, and picketing her rallies with signs that said Iron My Shirt?

Can someone explain this to me, please? What the fuck is wrong with CutieMouse making the perfectly rational and professional observation that winking and flirting is inappropriate in a VP debate context? What the fuck is wrong with BeachGurl pointing out that a double standard applied to Palin's lies exposes serious inadequacies in terms of her intelligence and/or preparedness? What the fuck is wrong with you reminding everybody of the oft-ignored fact that Palin's under investigation for abuse of power in her own freakin' state? What the fuck is wrong with Fury pointing out that she's a puppet, when nearly everything that comes out of her mouth is word-for-word recitation of verbiage she's been instructed to say?

Really. What the fuck?

Since when did legitimate objection become trash talking? And where the HELL were all these overly protective wannabe censors when HRC was being skewered on a daily basis?

I'm giving this person the quiet benefit of the doubt, JM. I could go on for days, but let's just say that my objections to the not fully loaded intellectual packet of the Veep pick are unfaiiiiir for a moment.

And no I don't think she's a moron. But I don't think she's *smart enough for this.*

My point is that honestly, they'd apply if she was the second coming of Wellstone in that same body and delivery, with those same intellectual limitations, with the same lack of substantials.

 

[Sir_Winston54]

In effect, we would have gone in to excise a boil, administer some antibiotics (help them set up at least a semi-reasonable temporary reorganization government), and discharge them from the ER.

Oh man. Destabilize and run? You do realize why Afghanistan is Afghanistan, don't you?

I didn't say, "destabilize and run." I said get Saddam out, help set up a temporary reorganization government, and *then* get out.

 

[Netzach]

I didn't say, "destabilize and run." I said get Saddam out, help set up a temporary reorganization government, and *then* get out.

Gotcha. Kind of like now, but earlier.

This doesn't always have the best track record as a solution, globally. But it's sure been done. Sometimes to good effect sometimes to bad. Never to good effect without economic bolstering of your new state. Big time.

We were in a recession then too, weren't we?

 

[Sir_Winston54]

Gotcha. Kind of like now, but earlier.

Exactly. Because earlier, it would have been much easier to do, and taken much less of our resources and energy (psychic).

 

[intothewoods]

Uh - pardon? Trash talking? Trash talking?

I've got a better question. Why is it that most people said absolutely NOTHING when so many spent so much time insulting Hilary Clinton's physical appearance, incessantly calling her a bitch, and picketing her rallies with signs that said Iron My Shirt?

Can someone explain this to me, please? What the fuck is wrong with CutieMouse making the perfectly rational and professional observation that winking and flirting is inappropriate in a VP debate context? What the fuck is wrong with BeachGurl pointing out that a double standard applied to Palin's lies exposes serious inadequacies in terms of her intelligence and/or preparedness? What the fuck is wrong with you reminding everybody of the oft-ignored fact that Palin's under investigation for abuse of power in her own freakin' state? What the fuck is wrong with Fury pointing out that she's a puppet, when nearly everything that comes out of her mouth is word-for-word recitation of verbiage she's been instructed to say?

Really. What the fuck?

Since when did legitimate objection become trash talking? And where the HELL were all these overly protective wannabe censors when HRC was being skewered on a daily basis?

In the talking heads world (you know, Georgetown cocktail parties and the Washington media elite), I think that part of the let's take feminist talking points and turn them on their head approach (that we saw a lot of when Palin was first announced) was rooted in mysogyny and a hatred of feminists. Or at least that was behind the glee you could hear in the voices of certain commentators.

Had Palin's shtick just been frontier woman, mom, Washington outsider, etc., I would not have had such a negative reaction to her. That she and her supporters said, this is a win for all women, and it is sexist to challenge anything about me, was a huge fuck you to feminists.

 

[Netzach]

Exactly. Because earlier, it would have been much easier to do, and taken much less of our resources and energy (psychic).

Right. It's the fiscal ones that are a bit harder to come by though, and I think you can't underestimate how important they are to whether this is going to bode well, or have a government that gets pulled down by revisionist religious fundamentalists.

 

[JMohegan]

I'm giving this person the quiet benefit of the doubt, JM. I could go on for days, but let's just say that my objections to the not fully loaded intellectual packet of the Veep pick are unfaiiiiir for a moment.

And no I don't think she's a moron. But I don't think she's *smart enough for this.*

My point is that honestly, they'd apply if she was the second coming of Wellstone in that same body and delivery, with those same intellectual limitations, with the same lack of substantials.

Saying that you've seen no evidence Palin's smart enough for this? That's not trash talking. That's a fair observation on a legitimate standard that can, and should, be applied to all candidates - regardless of party.

George Will has raised this very same point about Palin. What makes it unfair for you?

I guess my response to this person would be to turn it around, and ask: What evidence do you have that Palin IS smart enough to handle the Presidency? On what is this person's comfort with Palin's mental horsepower and preparedness based?

 

[Netzach]

Saying that you've seen no evidence Palin's smart enough for this? That's not trash talking. That's a fair observation on a legitimate standard that can, and should, be applied to all candidates - regardless of party.

George Will has raised this very same point about Palin. What makes it unfair for you?

I guess my response to this person would be to turn it around, and ask: What evidence do you have that Palin IS smart enough to handle the Presidency? On what is this person's comfort with Palin's mental horsepower and preparedness based?

Dude, relax. I'm allowing someone a second of devil's advocacy. My point is that if anyone from any party said I want this kind of person to be a heartbeat away from the presidency, it's a no confidence based on her lack of ability to do the job. Not just partisan rejection on my part.

 

[JMohegan]

In the talking heads world (you know, Georgetown cocktail parties and the Washington media elite), I think that part of the let's take feminist talking points and turn them on their head approach (that we saw a lot of when Palin was first announced) was rooted in mysogyny and a hatred of feminists. Or at least that was behind the glee you could hear in the voices of certain commentators.

Had Palin's shtick just been frontier woman, mom, Washington outsider, etc., I would not have had such a negative reaction to her. That she and her supporters said, this is a win for all women, and it is sexist to challenge anything about me, was a huge fuck you to feminists.

Ya think?

The New Face of Feminism.

 

[Netzach]

Ya think?

The New Face of Feminism.

"governor when you go fishing do you bait your own hooks?"
'Cause in HI, we drive a spear through its brain with precision. Little harder than shooting a wolf from a plane.

 

[intothewoods]

Ya think?

The New Face of Feminism.

Fun times. I hadn't read that before.

 

[Netzach]

Fun times. I hadn't read that before.

Great authors have written masterworks while drugged out of their minds on opiates. Sadly that's not one of 'em.

 

[JMohegan]

Dude, relax. I'm allowing someone a second of devil's advocacy. My point is that if anyone from any party said I want this kind of person to be a heartbeat away from the presidency, it's a no confidence based on her lack of ability to do the job. Not just partisan rejection on my part.

I'm sure it helps that you know "this person" - who is presumably reasonable and fair-minded in other respects.

If I seem pissed here, it's because I'm a play-fair kind of a guy who is fed up and disgusted beyond belief with Republicans who have no qualms about launching personal attacks and smears of the most outrageous kind, but then turn around and scream sexism, classism, elitism, whateverthefuckism, if someone dares to criticize their ticket.

 

[intothewoods]

Great authors have written masterworks while drugged out of their minds on opiates. Sadly that's not one of 'em.

Ha. Yeah. Eh, it's why I stopped listening to Michael Savage. At some point (a long time ago), it just wasn't funny anymore. It all got too ugly.