Mr Petergorsky's argument is off base. This is the United States, Mr. Petergorsky, not (say) France: "working-class" and "unionized" may be synonymous in France, but they're sure as hell not synonymous in the US, where "working-class" has more or less become synonymous with social conservatism of the sort that the GOP has done its best to enflame for the last 40 years.

In picking a young, untested, half-a-term Senator from Illinois to be their nominee for President, the Democrats opened the door for Senator John McCain to pick a fresh faced VP candidate. With the exception of oratory skills, Gov. Palin has MORE EXPERIENCE in the executive branch of government than Obama.

Nobody cried foul when Obama moved directly from the Illinois State Legislature to the U.S. Senate and a seat on the foreign relations committee.

Harvard Law Review or Alaskan Beauty Queen; Mayor of Wassila or Community Organizer; Governor of the largest state in the Union or the new Chicago Machine flag bearer?

The Palin choice gives the lie to any notion that McCain is a moderate. Attacking this pairing on the issues is what will sink them. Palin is an outspoken extremist on a whole range of issues, from the environment to abortion/birth control, to education, equal pay and human rights. And on foreign policy she has no clue about anything, a person who isn't informed, doesn't read, has no fund of knowledge, except to back the Bush/McCain policies.

Palin advocates criminalizing abortion and even the use of birth control like IUDs or Plan B, taking the line that they are murder. She opposes birth control pills and condoms, even for married couples. Palin is opposed to government policies of environmental protection, including an opposition to any protection for polar bears, and would gut the Endangered Species Protection Act. She is opposed to any gay rights protection, considering homosexuality a grievous sin and unworthy of legal protections. She doesn't believe in science and believes Creationism should be taught in the schools, and doesn't accept the science on global warming, believing it is not a human caused phenomenon. Palin and her partner, McCain, are extremists, outside the American mainstream and have no claim to popular support and governance.

This line of attack is suggested in this post by the president of the polling organization Research 2000.

People with less executive experience than Sarah Palin:

John McCain Barack Obama JFK (when he ran for President) John McCain

People with more executive experience than Sarah Palin

George W. Bush (when he ran for President) Jimmy Carter (when he ran for President) Richard Nixon (When he ran for President) Jerry Brown Neil Goldschmidt

Wait. What was the point of this excercise again? Oh, yeah. There isn't one.

Man, the trolls are really out on these Palin threads. We should be flattered that they care so much that they patrol the page so religiously from under their bridges.

It's a deeply cynical selection. She checks a bunch of boxes McCain wants - woman, conservative, attractive, not a threat to his authority. If you need any examples of how inexperienced she is, just look at the way she's handled Troopergate in Alaska. Regardless of whether she did anything inappropriate in the underlying incident, she screwed up the investigation royally, doing everything possible to make herself look guilty. Appointing a political ally to do a "pre-investigation" and tampering with all the witnesses is really a rookie move. It's a classic case of not understanding executive politics.

In the end, it boils down to this - can anyone really say that she would have been selected if she was a man?

It means McCain has the balls to appoint a woman as VP and Obama doesn't - he simply spit on Hillary voters and told Hillary either she supports him or she will be stuck with her debt.

BTW - Palin is the ONLY one of the old boys club with any executive experience in government.

Let the Progressive hate machine proceed into full swing.

In the end, it boils down to this - can anyone really say that she would have been selected if she was a man?

Can anyone really say that Obama would have been selected if he were white?

Answer: Absolutely not!

Selecting Palin may have been a calculated and cynical decision, but it may also turn out to have been brilliant. Too early to tell obviously, but I am reluctantly impressed that McCain and the Repub machine found a way to excite the mega-church masses and at the same time troll for disaffected women voters. In such a close election, McCain may have found a way to gather a few extra percentage points. I hope not.

Why would a disaffected Clinton supporter vote for a ticket that advocates criminalizing abortion, outlawing some forms of birth control, opposing legal protections of equal pay for women,and opposing universal health care? I'm assuming that Hillary Clinton supporters were not voting for her soley because she has XX chromosomes, but McCain seems to think so.

This choice tells me that John McCain, in choosing a VP who he doesn't know at all(introduced once briefly at a political gathering), overlooking the stronger candidates in his own party, male and female, doesn't put his country first, that he's damn cynical, and that he has poor judgment, politically and otherwise.

Oh you lefties.

I heard your talk radio Mike Malloy call Alan Keyes a lunatic, Clarence Thomas a moron and McCain a war criminal. And he used G-- Damn to ratchet it up.

Nice fodder from the love crowd.

Dan, that was my thought immediately. I would think that, if McCain was serious about attracting the "disaffected women voters," he would have chosen someone who more closely resembled the candidate they had backed. Instead he played it safe by catering to the social conservative movement.

As Hillary put it at the convention, the race isn't about her, but about the support for the Democratic programs dear to her supporters. Palin's choice strips the mask of palatability off the McCain option. When disaffected voters take a close look at Palin, they will be aghast. Any remaining protest vote should at that point be reduced to a write-in campaign or nonvoting.

It might be cynical. Seems more pandering to me. But that is what politicians do. The DNC and Obama campaign seem more cynical to me by refusing to include Hillary on the dem ticket - after the vote was a tie. That is cynical arrogance of breathtaking levels. It did drive away men and women from the party.

We'll see if Palin is a brilliant choice. She is a reformer and has taken on her own party and has taken on big $ and raised taxes on big oil, giving tax relief to taxpayers. That might appeal.

If the republicans start to attack (most likely after the convention) Obama's judgment as far as his connections to corruption in the corrupt Chicago political atmosphere, and contrast that with the reformer-Palin it will be a formidable line of attack.

We dems set ourselves up for this. The lefty blogs are going crazy - and the spew is embarrassing. It turns out we don't own hope and change also it turns out we are just as guilty of suppression, my-way-or-the-highway, name calling, and irrational hatred. No one is calming down. I bet the repubs are laughing their a$$es off. Some faux progressives are attacking her because she is NOT a stay at home mom. Some say her youngest baby is not hers. If that is true then a bit of verification might help before the wild attacks. I am ashamed of how the dems have handled themselves, from the DNC to the fake roll call to the screeching hate. What is happening to the party?

This election will not be decided on positions IMO. At least not the traditional D vs R positions. Pro-life is now being honored by dems. Kaine who is strongly pro-life was HONORED by Obama by speaking at the convention on the exact anniversary of women's right to vote. That is seen as symbolic. If Kaine had been Obama's vp pick would the left get as unhinged as it has about Palin's?

If the left wants certain issues like abortion then we need to work down ticket! We need to make congress not just a rubber stamp roll over do nothing.

I can't tell if "Mssr. Veep TiTiTi" is being sarcastic.

You know, the phrase "Executive Experience" gets kicked around a lot, and it's a mistake to try and equate that with Presidential experience.

Should a candidate who served as class president in high school be considered having "executive experience"?

To suggest that the governorship of Alaska engenders ANY experience whatsoever is a joke. Palin was dealing with the nation's smallest legislature (of which both chambers are run by her own party leaders), in a state where the population is about the size of Portland.

I wouldn't consider Mayor Potter "more experienced than JFK," but apparently John McCain would.

Can anyone really say that Obama would have been selected if he were white?

I'd like to ask the Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard admissions boards the same question. Certainly he was awarded additional points for his ethnicity, but it that what put him over the top at these three institutions?

inbf, so now the election won't be based on positions? What then is it based on? If you phrased it as, "swing voters may easily be swayed to vote based on non-position issues" then I would have to agree. I would not dispute that there will be a large "not voting for a person of color" vote or a "this is just Bush III" vote. But then this style of voting has typified most presidential elections of the past 30 years at least.

I have faith that most voters do their homework--maybe not as thoroughly as they should, but they do think about the issues. What Palin represents is just the thinnest of veneers. Even the lightest touch from the belt sander of intellectual scrutiny should bring us down to the base wood.

Mondale/Ferraro? Am I the only one who remembers? It took the GOP 24 years (6 election cycles) to nominate a woman VP, but somehow it's historic.

And now I'm done. I can't believe anyone is wasting time discussing Palin. The sad thing is that it'll probably work. Enough people will buy the idea of her and ignore how ridiculous the whole situation is. It's a marketing ploy rather than a plan for America, but we're very well conditioned to respond.

Dan, unions make up less than 12% of the private employer workforce. Certainly they comprise a much higher percentage of the stae, county and school district workforces. I wonder if there is a voting trend in those ranks?

Actually I think that the choice of running mate is very interesting. It could certainly be a platform of the emerging West compared to the established East. Either way, I love reading the pontifactors try to spin it their way. Face it y'all, McCain effectively took Obama-biden off the front page before the Dem convention was 1 day old.

@ inbf -or whatever your name is

What a completely dishonest post! Kaine does not advocate making women and doctors into criminals. He does not advocate the overturning of Roe v. Wade. As a matter of public policy he does not propose criminalizing the termination of a pregnancy, whereas McCain and Palin do.

Politics is about public policy. And your claim that positions don't matter is equally dishonest. A vote for McCain/Palin is a vote to privatize soc. security, criminalize abortion and some forms of birth control, a vote to have permanent bases in Iraq, a vote to go to war with Iran ( and possibly Russia when they side with Iran), a vote to dismantle environmental protections, a vote to have more trade agreements that send American jobs overseas, a vote for more tax breaks for the wealthy and the multinational corporation, and a vote against any possibility of having universal health care. Give me a break.. positions don't matter! Get back to your Republican classroom and learn to be a better troll!

The point is the Republican party has become an extremist party outside the American mainstream and is devoid of any policy ideas to help our country.

I really love the silly stuff about "executive experience". By definition this phony criterion means that presidents must come from the ranks of mayors, county executives, and governors. Hey, maybe we can even throw in a few rapacious business executives while we're at it.

In the era of "reality television," this pick is perfectly appropriate.

Cooking as merely your favorite hobby? You can have a television show, book tour, and become the next Julia Childs.

Just finished business school? Donald Trump will provide you the opportunity to be the CEO of a Fortune 500 corporation.

"Executive experience"? Yes, mayor of Mayberry and two years as Governor of a state that is red, red, red.

Hillary Clinton supporters should be especially insulted. That McCain right-wingers are attempting to claim that this softer version of Katherine Harris is somehow worthy of the support of Clinton-voters is insulting.

ALL AMERICANS should be insulted that McCain and the right-wing Republicans believe we're stupid enough to believe that: 1) This right-wing neophyte is even remotely prepared to be the leader of the free world; 2) That political ideology is irrelevant, and somehow gender trumps policy positions.

Still, Americans love their reality television shows, and the Horatio Alger myth. Every city council member and alderman could be President of the US.

McCain's slogan should be: "So You Think That You Could be VP?"

"The point is the Republican party has become an extremist party outside the American mainstream and is devoid of any policy ideas to help our country."

Oh brother,,, How did they do that?

And the Michale Moore/DailyKos/MoveOn democrats are moderate and mainstream?

And if only the country could be run like moderate Portland or San Fransisco?

How is it that you D's can have such a broad collection of extreme fanatics and yet fantasize about being moderate and mainstream?

I mean what are the counter parts in the R's equal to your far lefty cabal?

Moderate Thom Hartman thinks the "consevative corporatists are deliberately bankrupting this country to enrich them". He also says "there's noting of value in this country anymore so the rational invester has to go off shore."

"The constitution has been destroyed, habeous corpus lost and 911 was an inside job."

On and on and on I could go with looney left claims.

Now what are the looney right claims?

I know the predictable response I'll get.

Steve, a looney right claim? I dunno ...

How about that Palin is qualified for the VP slot, let alone the Presidency?

Bill r. (or whatever your name is) Did not mean to be 'dishonest' just pointing out that the issues are not clear, spin is sometimes symbolic and therefore meaningful. "Positions" change and laws come about thru the legislative - or that is the way it should be. Money rules both parties and infests all levels of government and that cannot be simply blamed on the 'other' side. Dems have to take responsibility for their actions like the repubs should have. And I still think that Obama's choice of Kaine on his short list and his honoring him at the convention on women's night was highly symbolic. We are dealing with many shades of grey.

It is amazing -the reaction of the lefty blogs. This may mean that Palin is a brilliant choice. What noise they are making! You would hardly think that in fact McCain is the underdog and that this year should be handed to the dems. Do they think McCain is an actual threat? Almost seems like it.

Dem's should just let the criticism of Palin rest. Let the media, the blabbering journalists, and incestuous talking heads analyze this selection themselves. It will be fine.

Instead, focus right now on McCains judgement, impulsiveness and decision making. The fact that he thinks that any decision seen as "out of the box" is the mark of a maverick with integrity, when in fact in many cases, it s mark of lack if intellectual rigor and the tendency to go with his gut rather than his head. (remind you of anyone?)

In McCains first major decision as the nominee, we should leave it to the media to conclude that he failed. THis is not a reflection of Gov. Palin, (what person in her position would turn down this opportunity) this is about McCain

So just who could have McCain selected that would have made this post or the one by Karol congratulatory? IOW, what would have made you happy? McCain & ??????n ?

Robert,

You re right. We can let the talking heads decipher this pick ... I just have had more lately questions about the analysts' judgment than about the ability of the voters to do research and actually think.

I came on here out of sheer incredulousness (is that a word?) at this pick--I've refrained from posting before in a political forum--and felt drawn to respond. Maybe that's why inbf has noted the quantity of Palin posts on blogs: thousands of us are scratching our heads and wondering what McCain could possibly be thinking!

Speaking for myself, I'm certainly not here because I think McCain is a new, potent threat. It's more in amazement, feeling the need to ask rhetorically, as my daughter might say in today's youth-speak, "Is McCain on crack?!"

Who knew? McCain really is a techie, into-the-Internet kind of guy after all! I guess he was just trolling the web and found the little hometown site that was set up last year promoting Palin for a gig in the Lower 48: http://palinforvp.blogspot.com/

Web marketing really does work! I wonder if her resume is on monster.com?

Who knew? McCain really is a techie, into-the-Internet kind of guy after all! I guess he was just trolling the web and found the little hometown site that was set up last year promoting Palin for a gig in the Lower 48: http://palinforvp.blogspot.com/

Web marketing really does work! I wonder if her resume is on monster.com?

@Bob McCain would have had a choice that was respected, if not congratulated, if he had chosen from the distinguished, well qualified women and men in his party, thoughtful persons who are not extremist in viewpoint, knowledgeable about the country they aspire to serve, with proven character and leadership qualities. If he wanted to pander to the female vote, at least he could have chosen from the respected female leadership in the Republican party. A Kay Bailey, Hutchinson, or Olympia Snow would have been highly regarded choices.

"Can anyone really say that Obama would have been selected if he were white? "

Obama is where he is because of charisma, writing and speaking ability, honesty, and because he is very, very smart. His race may not have been noticed on Chicago's south side, or in the Illinois State legislature, but it could not have helped him win his Senate seat, and most certainly was not an asset on the journey to this nomination. A white man or woman with his intelligence and personality and oratory/literary skills would easily have done as well. There are such people, but they take their Harvard Law degrees and pursue career paths in private enterprise, where the cash compensation is way better. To suppose that an African-American with a Moslem name is somehow working at an advantage in US politics is absurd.

...and meanwhile, whatever happened to the Democrats' 50-state strategy? All indications are that we're back to the electoral map of recent years, with everything hinging on a handful of states....

ON McCAIN AND LABOR McCain can try to pander to the Labor Unions, but we absolutely know better!

Recent research shows that 60 million U.S. workers would join a Union if they could. It is well beyond time to pass the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). For more info and to sign a petition click here: http://www.aflcio.org/joinaunion/voiceatwork/efca/

And the fact that recent misguided conservative advertising attempts in Oregon are running in direct opposition to what McCain is just now trying to sell (w/Palin) is proof enough that he is completely disingenuous.

ON PALIN AND WOMEN How can anyone in their right-mind think that a huge faction of Women (particularly Hillary supporters) will jump ship for Palin – I have just one stop sign of a word for you, “Pro-choice.” Palin on a personal level (Woman to Woman) insults in her belief that Women are not intelligent enough to decide what to do with their own bodies. Can anyone please explain to me how it is that Palin votes to kill wolves and polar bears, but professes to be pro-life?!

For the respect of all Women Palin should have declined the position of VP. She was offered the job simply because of her gender and with her acceptance she relegated herself to nothing more than a pawn.

It’s like Hillary said, “No way! No how! NO McCain!”

P.S. Dumbing-down the entire female populace by saying that women support a political candidate simply because of their gender is sexist and insulting. The same goes for discussion suggesting that any Voter support a candidate simply based on their gender, ethnicity, sexual preference, etc…

Suggesting that a populist reform governor was selected based purely on her gender is sexist and insulting.

If you keep demeaning Governor Palin's fitness and ability for national office, you demean all women. Hate her politics if you want to, but don't hate her for being a woman VP candidate.

It's not like Saint Obama has a track record on foreign affairs, not unless you count his poly-sci undergraduate "specialization" in International Relations.

Yes, McCain did have other more qualified candidates to choose from. So did the dems for the nominee! It has been one reason the dem pick has been exciting - it is a bit edgy and changey. Now the repubs have that too. It certainly has gotten everyone's attention.

I just surfed around and the net (I start with blogometer.nationaljournal.com) to the lefty sites and righty sites and PUMA sites and the reaction is loud. She is energizing the blogs and media. Seems lots on the left are just bewildered. Social conservatives are happy and fiscal conservatives are happy and reformists are happy and PUMAs are happy.

I predict we should not write off her or the value of this choice for McCain. It give him so much. His base is ecstatic and highy energized. She has much to say about reform. I predict it will become a hope and change vs. change by cleaning up and reforming DC. race. The dems start with hope and change and belief and repubs counter with something not just practical, but change via reform. That is how it is looking to me.

Wonder how this will affect Merkley vs Smith? Unfortunately Smith is playing the surface politics well. Since this is a safely blue state I hope Obama will come here to help Merkley.

The 50 state 'stragedy' is going to fail. It was a good idea, for the LONG TERM and would work only if the electoral college was eliminated - a reform I'm all in favor of. But until then it really will come down to swing states. Howard Dean is terrible and now will have to show that he started this 'stragedy' only as a power play with the DLC and DCCC.

Bottom line - the last person to go from the Senate to President-Elect was JFK. American voters don't warm up much to Senators running the country. The Obama-Biden ticket gives us two Senators from an august body with a satisfaction rating below that of Bush. The McCain-Palin ticket gives us one Senator and a Governor. American voters generally prefer governors moving towards the White House.

torridjoe,

"She has a vagina too" dismissiveness will cost the Democrats this election. Sarah Palin is more than her genitalia.

And those commenters who believe that WOMEN (in aggregate) have a unified view on reproductive rights or nationalized healthcare need to read the party/gender breakdowns on current opinion polls.

Wow, a bunch of uptight political junkies who need to get laid in my opinion.

All I can say is, Obama will have a harder time getting the white male vote regardless of whether it is white collar, blue collar, pink collar or ummm...Popped collar.

I hate to be typically male, but Palin is smoking hot to say the least. My God would I love to see her on TV for the next 4 years.

I can see why liberal women and feminists despise this pick. Palin is everything that they are not:

1. Attractive (I love all those sexy pics of Palin and so do all my 18 to 184 year old male friends)
2. Congenial (not a raving bitch)
3. Married to what my Mother considers a "Hunk and a half"
4. Has 5 beautiful children (3 girls and 2 boys)
5. Skyrocketed through the political ranks in Alaska (When was Vera Katz ever Governor of Oregon? Oh wait, she is too much of a left wing fringe player to be one...Ouch!)
6. Has a very good damn chance of being the first female Vice President

Finally, the only issue I see this race coming down to is what dress Sarah Palin is wearing and what high heels she is wearing.

As for Palin's experience, her choice in shoes conveys that she has more experience to run this country than Hillary Clinton ever will. I am sorry, I just don't see a woman who chooses a God awful prison orange jumpsuit as the next President of the United States of America.

BTW, this post is meant to be taken lightly.

I think "youngoregonmoonbat" is a great name for a McCain slime troll, don't you?? Likewise for "lospenegana"!

I think you folks need to go back for further training from the McCain campaign.

Pathetic!

Sarah Palin is the change that is needed in Washington. Partisan politicians on both sides of the aisle better watch out!

Jenni, yes, I should have clarified - 50 state will fail for the national election. the DCCC worked with the DNC (tho they were extremely critical of Dean) and did a good job last election. I wish congress had followed thru. I still think with the electoral college in place it will fail in the national election.Not saying the dems will lose - it should not be too close to call but it is.

cc, You said "Choosing a woman because she's a woman is sexism. Choosing an underqualified person because she's a woman is sexism.

If her name was Bob Palin - with equal experience - "he" would be ripped apart even more and on both sides of the aisle. I take that back - "Bob" would be at home in Alaska today because he would never have been selected at all! She was chosen based on demographic, not based on experience and her ability to lead this country is in serious question. "

You realize this is a very harsh version of what Ferraro said? Obama extremists accused her of racism and screeched all over about it throwing obscenities and bigoted names at her. I hope you were one who righteously defended her!

I do not think it is sexism that she is a vp pick and I do not think it is racism that BO is a pres nominee. I do think each taps into a demographic. Is is some form of bigotry to pick an old white insider politician as one's vp? Are old white experienced guys insulted and huffing about it?

Interesting several commenters have noted their "mom's" views. Sigh. If you surf around you will see that Palin will get a significant number of Hillary supporters. Maybe not in hyper happy progressive Portland. It makes Portland a fun place to live, but still, we are part of the USA and we have to take that into account. Most women are not one issue voters. The dems need to face this or they will be left confused...."wha? wha happened? but my mom voted Obama....."

cc - I have not heard that Palin does not support equal pay for women. Does that include other minorities? Where did you read that, what news source? Seriously, I would like to learn more about her record.

Talkleft.com is a site that is good for information and debate. They have been vetting her today and there's lots of information on her. The site is the ONLY site I have found where dems take on issues while having highly differing views while not degenerating into name calling and bullying. There are Obama supporters Clinton supporters, PUMAs and those who will vote McCain and those Nader. Scroll down to the part about her positions on Abortion Iraq etc.

Posted by: Oregon Independent | Aug 30, 2008 12:32:11 PM "The difference, of course, is that Michael Moore and Daily Kos are essentially marginal players within the Democratic establishment."

Oh what a cherry pick. I said Michael Moore/Daily Kos & MoveOn, which you ignored.

Moore/Kos/MoveOn/George Soros/Arianna Huffington/Keith Olberman,,,,are they all essentially marginal players within the Democratic establishment?

Not hardly. That is the democrat establishment and all of your politicians are either with them or afraid of them.

And my greater point you ignored.

I mean what are the counter parts in the R's equal to your far lefty cabal? I mean what are the counter parts in the R's equal to your far lefty cabal? I mean what are the counter parts in the R's equal to your far lefty cabal?

You all seem to want the country could to be run like Portland or San Fransisco?

How is it that you D's can have such a broad collection of extreme fanatics and yet fantasize about being moderate and mainstream?

Moderate Thom Hartman thinks the "consevative corporatists are deliberately bankrupting this country to enrich them". He also says "there's noting of value in this country anymore so the rational invester has to go off shore."

"The constitution has been destroyed, habeous corpus lost and 911 was an inside job."

On and on and on I could go with looney left claims.

Now what are the looney right claims?

If you think it is looney to think Palin is qualified to VP then you are certainly nuts up for thinking Obama is qualified for P.

Sorry to disappoint you, Steve, "Moore/Kos/MoveOn/George Soros/Arianna Huffington/Keith Olberman,,,,are they all essentially marginal players within the Democratic establishment?

Not hardly. That is the democrat establishment and all of your politicians are either with them or afraid of them. "

but the "Democratic establishment" such as it is, is the folks who were at the convention, the DNC chair (who doesn't always agree with fellow Chicagoan Rahm Emanuel of the Congressional leadership), etc. The idea that bloggers, commentators, the film maker from my native state of Michigan, etc. do our thinking for us is laughable.

Steve, you have obviously not been paying attention --- the GOP Platform Comm. made a decision this year to have proper usage in their platform, hence they will mention the DEMOCRATIC Party in their platform, and save "democrat party" for only verbal usage. A former RNC chair was quoted in the newspaper announcing the change.

Jenni, LT, anyone... I have a couple of questions, sorry if it is a bit off thread. Campaigns for accepted races for congress, once the DCCC has approved them and the campaigns have already raised funds recieve $ directly from the DCCC, right? The DNC provides $ for local organizing for the presidential election. Is that correct? (I'm not being snarky about this. I'm still learning) So does that mean in the 50 state strategy that the states receive funds based on the number of electoral votes they have, their populations or what? Does the DNC direct $ to the DCCC? For example, does the Merkley campaign recieve $ from both the DNC and DCCC or just the DCCC? What about representatives?

If Obama campaign does not take federal campaign finance funds does that mean that there will be more $ that the DNC can funnel to the DCCC? If the Obama campaign does not take federal campaign funds (which they are not) then who directs the $ allocation, them or the DNC? Is Dean going to restrict $ from swing states in order to follow the 50 state strategy? Is he counting on huge fundraising by Obama team to provide extra $ for allocation to the DCCC?

Sorry for the many questions. If you know of a site where I could get unbiased info I would appreciate the link. Or sites with differing biases (since bias is everywhere, at least with differing biases I can add the biased facts together, subtract the biases and see what is left over)

The 50 State Strategy is not just "money is all that matters". It is also a philosophy that there is more to winning elections than just spending money--although money is important. It is an attitude contrary to the old "we professionals will target, and if your race is not a target race then sorry, your race doesn't count".

It is the philosophy spelled out in Dean's book YOU HAVE THE POWER!.

Many Democrats were tired of hearing that the battle ground states or races were well known in advance and no one had the right to question them. Dean says in his book "If you are looking for leadership, look in the mirror!".

I don't know the financial details, but I do know there is argument between various factions over whether targets are the way to go. Don't expect me to have a lot of respect for either DSCC or DCCC given previous behavior.

One reason behind this change is the Colorado result in 2004. Below the level of president, Colorado went Democratic in 2004, electing a US Senator, taking over legislative leadership, etc. During the convention, I heard someone (Sen. Salazar?) from Colorado saying that the Kerry campaign pulled all their resources out of Colorado sometime in October--had they stayed, they might have won. Obama's fundraising will make it easier to contest all sorts of states.

It's pretty comical reading people complain that Sarah Palin doesn't know what the job of the vice president is. Her real question was, "Someone needs to tell me what the veep does every day."

Get that woman the excellent audio book of David McCullough's TRUMAN biography!

OI, I agree with you EXCEPT for one thing. Not sure what will happen in the future, but so far Palin looks more mature than Quayle--she didn't practically jump up and down when being named. Time will tell when she will have her first "deer in the headlights" moment. Most candidates have such moments at one time or another. There is only one VP debate scheduled, but there will likely be joint appearances, speaking to the same gatherings/ conventions, etc. We'll see how she does.

For now, McCain finally broke the nomination glass ceiling that Democrats broke 24 years ago. And I'd take someone with a lot to learn over a know-it-all like Danny Boy Quayle any day of the week!

Wow, Jenni, thanks. Very informative - I'll have to spend some time with this when I'm not so tired and partied out! I have family who worked with the DCCC (they call it the D/Ccubed) in Chicago for (can't remember her first name) Duckworth in the '06 election. It seems in that case they needed to see that the candidate was serious and was ideologically in line and passed several fundraising targets on its own before giving $ to her campaign. They must choose one candidate and hence all the accusation of 'conservative' and 'progressive' - often in the eye of the beholder and sometimes not too easy to discern?

A couple more quick questions (and I really have not absorbed all of your gracious post yet so this is an aside)... does the DNC give funds to all of the primary candidates? Equally? Of the initial, what was is, 8 dem primary candidates did all receive DNC funds - or none at that point? It seems more likely that the DNC holds out on allocating any $ to presidential candidates until the primary is over and the nominating convention is past. The DNC. Maybe I'm confused. Maybe the DNC only allocates to the structural organizations that support a presidential campaign on the ground in the states. The campaigns buy the ads etc and the DNC provides the structure. So the 50 state strategy means that there is structure in every state for the presidential election - and has nothing to do with the down ticket structures? They must be intertwined.

I know the DNC has been in the tank for one candidate for 6 months. How could that have affected the primary?

Also, is it because of the internet driven fundraising that Dean pioneered that the 50ss challenged the old way of raising $? Are there other differences between the DNC and DLC? I will assume a pro DNC bias from you but have a lot of respect and gratitude that you are so willing to debate and provide information! (And you can assume a pro DLC bias from me but I'm willing to learn and change my mind.....as a last resort)

since I cannot figure out how to post a link (even with the oh so very user friendly easy instructions below) I wanted to direct attention to a little fun on the subject. On youtube, Red State Update and see their take on Palin.

Jack,

Once again, you're really reaching.

Number one, Howard Dean wasn't hand-picked for his spot as front-runner, he workeed hard to get there.

Number two, Howard Dean was Governor of Vermont for ELEVEN + YEARS, not less than two years. Before that, he was Lieutenant Governor for four years.

Number three, Howard Dean was not under investigation for official misconduct at the time he was the front-runner for the nomination.

Sarah Palin is currently un-qualified for national office. She has recently stated that she doesn't know much about Iraq, which just happens to be the biggest issue facing the country at this time.

thanks again Jenni. I am very grateful for your responses and information. Much of this confirms (more articulately and with more detail) what I have already learned and there are, for me, some very good information that is new to me. I'm sure I should know who you are, so please excuse my ignorance.

So, if the DNC stays out of the primary race, then why did the DNC come out so strongly in favor of one candidate to the point of obviously attempting to undermine the other candidate? Why did the DNC selectively decide to punish only two states when there were several who moved their primaries? Why did the RBC apply rules in a biased way? Since Donna Brazile stated that the aim of the DNC is to change the demographic of the democratic party, does this underly the discord between the DNC and the DLC/Bill Clinton wing of the party too? Should the DNC change and pressure the rules of the nominating convention to disallow a roll call? Since they did, is that fair?

Why did the new 50 state strategy authors reject the previous strategy outright and not try to work WITH it and transition harmoniously? If Dean is so successful with his new form of fundraising then why do they even care about Senator Clinton's donors? It seems he wants the Clinton wing to work FOR him but now with him and pressures and threatens if Bill and Hillary do not.

As I understand it the DNC is the body responsible for fully vetting the candidates, but am not sure when that is supposed to happen. When do they finally have all necessary documentation? And is that documentation available for review? If it is available for review is that by the courts or other government agencies?

I assume you are in the Portland area? Would you be willing to meet me for coffee and discussion since this discussion is very off the thread topic? I assume you are very busy and could easily understand your not wanting to. If so you can email me. Thanks.

Steve said: "Oh you lefties. I heard your talk radio Mike Malloy call Alan Keyes a lunatic, Clarence Thomas a moron and McCain a war criminal. And he used G-- Damn to ratchet it up. Nice fodder from the love crowd and "And the Michale Moore/DailyKos/MoveOn democrats are moderate and mainstream? And if only the country could be run like moderate Portland or San Fransisco?" and "Moore/Kos/MoveOn/George Soros/Arianna Huffington/Keith Olberman,,,,are they all essentially marginal players within the Democratic establishment? Not hardly. That is the democrat establishment and all of your politicians are either with them or afraid of them."

First of all, Steve, there are few if any "lefties" on BO or in the DP. Guys like you should stop being greedy and accept the gift of a right-of-center corporatist hack every four years. Michael Moore is the only one on your list who any reasonably knowledgeable person would consider to be to the left of the US center (although he is a moderate by international standards), and he has turned into a partisan hack this election season. The US is functionally politically illiterate, and that's why move-on and its ilk are considered "far left" by anyone.

Second, Mike Malloy speaks for me on the topics you quote him on, but he is not pro-Democrat, and your listening powers should be called into question if you believe he is.

Third, San Francisco (I'm assuming that "San Fransisco" is a mis-spelling rather than some small town in Idaho) is more of a libertarian city than a "far left" one, and Portland has a long way to go before it can be considered to be left of the international center.

Lastly, I wish "Moore/Kos/MoveOn/George Soros/Arianna Huffington/Keith Olberman" were the DP "establishment", even if I disagree with them about the current election. The DP establishment is closer to you than to them.

Harry, Your social reach is way too narrow if you honestly believe all of that.

Thanks again Jenni, I guess I'll have to find more information about the internal power struggles and their effects on this primary elsewhere, but I learned a lot from you and I thank you. Best of luck with your campaign - Go Jenni!

About the DNC promoting Obama it was not the issue that two out of four states were punished (why not all? equally? what was it about those two in particular that deserved to be singled out for punishment?) but the pressure for one candidate to submit to their will for that candidate to leave the race. And Pelosi saying things like "GOD" has "given" us Obama. And much more. Well, some other time.

Again, best wishes.

inbf--do you believe that rules are rules?

"(why not all? equally? what was it about those two in particular that deserved to be singled out for punishment"

The Florida legislature set their primary outside the window for early primaries--both parties sanctioned them for this.

Certain Michigan politicians wanted to make a case that Michigan should be one of the early states--so they moved their primary way ahead, and some of the candidates took their names off the ballot as a result.

THAT is why Michigan and Florida were punished--no other states did that.

And about the Pelosi remark, hadn't heard that. She tried to stay out of the debate from what I could see.

In partisan politics, "the pressure for one candidate to submit to their will for that candidate to leave the race" happens more often than some would like to admit. But that isn't what happened in this case, given that Hillary got the big speech at the convention, the roll call vote, etc.

One more thing--as someone who once was a national delegate, state central comm. member, active in the process of rewriting rules.

The Democratic Party has a system of caucuses and primaries where the voters in those states choose the nominee, not any party organization.

So I have no clue what this refers to, "As I understand it the DNC is the body responsible for fully vetting the candidates, but am not sure when that is supposed to happen. "

The Democratic National Committee is responsible for electing the DNC chair, setting party rules, organizing the convention. VOTERS are given the role of "vetting" the candidates.

Steve said: "Harry, Your social reach is way too narrow if you honestly believe all of that."

Steve: I have a wide stance.

Here's why you guys should shut up while you're ahead: Joe Biden has been one of the leading congressional supporters of U.S. militarization of the Middle East and Eastern Europe, of strict economic sanctions against Cuba, and of Israeli crimes. He was perhaps the single most important congressional backer of the Bush invasion of Iraq. Obama's decision to pick Biden negates one of his biggest advantages in the general election, his supposed "better judgment" on the occupation, which probably was decisive in his victory over Clinton. (Biden, Iraq, and Obama's Betrayal)

Obama/Biden is a gift to the right-wing from their Democrat cousins. Instead of checking that donkey's teeth, you should be feeding it sugar. Even if you lose, you win.