Sarah Palin: McCain's Moment of Panic

Well now many of my fellow Barack supporters who had been nervous about Biden as the VP pick may rest assured since John McCain might have destroyed his chances by picking Sarah Palin as his running mate.

Sarah Palin is a rabidly right wing, gun-toting, environment-hating Republican whose ideology is sure to alienate everyone except for the most narrow-minded Evangelicals in the mold of James Dobson and Pat Robertson. This is a woman who believes that global warming is not caused by human activity and who adheres religiously (pun intended) to the imperialist credo that "man should rule over nature." In fact, she has fought hard to prevent government protection of polar bears (who doesn't like polar bears?) and has just recently destroyed a legislative attempt at protecting salmon from contamination. She has also fought for a pipeline that would pollute Alaska and stuff the already overflowing coffers of oil companies (accidentally, her husband works for BP despite assurances that he would stop working for the oil company if she won the governorship due to a possible conflict of interest--of course he later backtracked saying the family needed money).

Sarah Palin eschews any scientific thought by publicly proclaiming her belief in "intelligent design" and fighting to get it into our classrooms where it should be taught "alongside" evolution. The fact that evolution is a SCIENTIFIC THEORY and "intelligent design" a story from children's coloring books doesn't seem to fit into her decision-making process. Makes you see what kind of president she would make (God forbid).

Rarely, have VP candidates had a major impact on presidential elections in this country, but in this case, I really think Palin will hurt McCain. And here is why.

1) McCain will lose the West. In the most recent issue of the New Yorker, Ryan Lizza traces the reasons why the Democrats have experienced a revival of their fortunes in the West and in particular, in places like Colorado. He interviews their recently elected Democratic Governor Ritter who argues that his rise to power and the ousting of the Republicans from both Houses in the state had to do with an internal Republican party rebellion by the "government pragmatists" as well as "moral pragmatists." The first are economic Republicans who are less concerned with abortion, gay rights, and other polarizing issues and more with the way the government governs and impacts their daily life. The second are more religious Republicans who care about social issues, but still acknowledge the lack of consensus in the country and are increasingly focused on pragmatic daily things. The key to Democrats' success in the state has been their ability to cut into the two of these voting blocs. And the amazing demographic changes in the state (and the West) will certainly increase these voting blocs: the state is being transformed by the influx of more skilled, high tech as well as hospitality business employees, as well as more affluent skiers who are buying their second-homes in the suburbs. With Sarah Palin, McCain has probably lost his shot at Colorado, New Mexico, and maybe even Nevada.

2) McCain's Gender Blindness. Hillary's supporters will now run towards Obama, literally. McCain's poor and blatantly transparent attempt to appeal to women voters in this country by his VP choice shows a gender misunderstanding so appalling that you would think the man lives in the Victorian era. This man, and his Republican cohorts, seems to believe that any woman can appeal to other women in this country, regardless of her substance: her record on abortion rights alone is certain to alienate any woman who might have been tempted to vote for McCain but cares about issues of women's rights. The fact that Palin herself calls herself a "feminist for life," shows a complete lack of knowledge of what the feminist movement in this country has been all about, and also points to Palin's eschewing of any serious analytical thought. The offensiveness of this cynical appeal to women was best described by Gail Collins in NYT this morning: "The idea that women are going to race off to vote for any candidate with the same internal plumbing is both offensive and historically wrong."

3) McCain's Judgment. I think the choice shows the decision-making process (if we can call it that) of John McCain and offers us an important glimpse into the way President McCain would make decisions. This was a decision that was impulsive, reckless, blatantly cynical, and motivated by political pander rather than knowledge, calculation, and judgment. I have a feeling McCain was sitting home watching Barack's speech on Thursday night and after realizing the extent of Obama's appeal and his profound impact on people's emotions, he jumped out of his chair, fumbled through his notebook, and called Palin to offer her the job. Compare this decision to Barack's careful deliberations on his VP nominee.

4) Ideologization of Politics. Finally, McCain's choice shows that his administration would be continuation of George W. Bush in that ideology and not expertise and the thickness of one's resume would be the primary qualifications for spots in the administration. After we have endured 8 years of an administration that gave the top FEMA job to a former Arabian horse association president, filled the Justice Department with anti-abortion, anti-gay rights, anti-environment nut jobs, can we really afford 4 more years of an administration that would prize ideology above governance? This, I think, is the most potent line of attack the Democrats can (and absolutely should) make. It is also a legitimate argument.

As Collins suggests in her column, in VP debates, Biden should use the memorable line (used by Democratic VP Lloyd Bentsen against Republican Dan Quayle in 1988) against Palin: “I know Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton is a friend of mine, and governor, you’re no Hillary Clinton.”