I've seen a lot of people here at Daily Kos, in diaries as well as comments, speak about one of their wingnut relatives. One of the things I've always been grateful for is the fact that both of my parents are liberals. As such, my mom (who goes by MsDilloSC here at Daily Kos) and I never fail to discuss the Presidential race when we talk, and we talk frequently.
Today she drew my attention to Real Clear Politics - specifically the "Breaking News" section. She talked with me just a little about Daily Kos being referred to in several articles on RCP as the "looney left" and other such names. No news there - in a sea of rational analysis, the right will always choose the one or two things that climb the recommended diary list and decry us as the "looney left". So I don't really care about that - it can't be helped. But I do think we should focus on those areas where we can have our greatest impact as November looms. Please follow me over the fold.
That's the front page of RCP as of the writing of this diary. Note the uppder-left hand links - "Lefty Bloggers Go After Palin" - "Sarah Palin Due Some Apologies". The first I reference is from Townhall.com. The second is from The Washington Note. It's worth mentioning also that another article linked earlier in the day went to odious Michelle Malkin's Blog. At least one of those articles link back to a diary that was posted here on Daily Kos on Saturday (I won't link back to it). Totally absent is the fact that the vast, overwhelming majority of the 1,900+ comments to that diary were pleas to delete it and to leave Palin's daughter out of the discussion. But oh well. Who ever said full context mattered??
But I digress. What I want to focus on and what I want us, as a community, to focus on, are the things about Sarah Palin that matter. The fact that her 17-year old daughter is pregnant isn't really one of those. That's a news items - so it's certainly worthy of a mention as a news item. Aside, I think that that's one of the beauties of being pro-choice. I can embrace Bristol Palin's choice and wish her the best of luck. I do understand that some here would claim that the pregnancy is a jumping-off point for discussion about Sarah Palin's abstinence-only stance, which is a valid point for discussion. But it has to be discussed in the context of ALL Americans, not just Bristol Palin, AN American.
So with that out of the way, let me share a clip of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz on yesterday's CNN Newsroom, being interviewed by Rich Sanchez. After discussing the "Palin is no Hillary Clinton" angle, the real response that stood out for me begins at 1:21 of the video.
WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: Well, it was a good one then [Palin's no Hillary Clinton line] and it's appropriate and applicable now. Hillary Clinton has 35 years of public service. Sarah Palin has been Governor of a State that is smaller than my Congressional district for less than 18 months. I just don't know how John McCain thinks that this is a person who is going to be ready to be Commander in Chief with her hand on the tiller of America's foreign policy in the event that, God forbid, anything happens to him.
SANCHEZ: Here's why - two words - evangelical vote. Don't you think that would be a smart move or [unintelligible]?
WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: If he has to shore up the evangelical vote then he is in worse shape than everyone thought.
My emphasis added. That struck me and continues to strike me - because here's my theory behind why McCain chose Palin. After looking across the landscape of the general election, John McCain and his campaign realized that their only hope of victory in the general is to go for a "three-peat", where the election is driven by far-right turnout. Given the far-right's general disdain for John McCain, he knew he had to pick a fundamentalist Christian in the mold that makes Dobson look mild.
This is a HUGE gamble on his part. It is inarguable (or only mildly arguable) at this point that the far-right delivered the first election for George W. Bush and then, rallied by ensoulment and fear of homosexuals, delivered a second term. 2008 isn't 2000 or 2004, however. The Republican brand is tarnished to blackness. More importantly, Democrats are rising - not as quickly or with the margins we would all like to see, but they ARE rising. Most notable here is the distribution of Democratic-controlled state legislatures.
States where Democrats control both houses of State Legislatures:
Alabama
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Hawaii
Illinois
Iowa
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Minnesota
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
North Carolina
Oregon
Rhode Island
Vermont
Washington
West Virginia
States where Democrats and Republicans split Legislative Control
Delaware
Indiana
Kentucky
Michigan
Montana
Nevada
New York
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania
Tennessee
Virginia
Wisconsin
States where Republicans control both Legislative Houses
Alaska
Arizona
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Kansas
Missouri
North Dakota
Ohio
South Carolina
South Dakota
Texas
Utah
Wyoming
(Nebraska has a non-partisan legislature) (source)
The states that I've included in BOLD are the so-called battlegrounds. Yes, I realize that North Carolina is a stretch, but Ive kept it in there. Of those 14, only THREE have State legislatures solely controlled by Republicans. In the states with full or split Legislative control by Democrats, the ability of Republicans to drive wedge issues onto the ballot to drive far-right turnout is limited to non-existent.
This truly IS a "Hail Sarah" pass on McCain's part. With a diminished ability to drive wedge issues onto the ballot, McCain seems to be counting on rabid support for Palin on the ticket to overcome in sufficient numbers the formulaic deficit that exists in 2008 but was present in 2000 and 2004. I think that's a far stretch. Coupled with this is a tandem hope that a) non far-right women will vote Palin because she possesses a vagina; and b) non far-right voters generally won't be paying attention to Palin's lack of political experience.
So our targets are clear - and the good news is, our targets remain the same, notwithstanding the Palin pick. McCain's strategy had been to tout "experience" and "ready to lead" to capture some moderate Democrats, disaffected Hillary Clinton voters, Independents, and moderate Republicans. He is, right now, closer to God - because he's praying that these constituencies won't notice the host of Palin's very real, very relevant shortcomings.
The one thing I agree with John McCain on is that it truly is "Country First". Where I disagree is that John McCain should be the one putting the slogan forward as its operating principle. Daily Kos diarists have done an excellent job of starting the relevant opposition research.
In my humble opinion, given what I laid out above, we need to STAY FOCUSED on turning out our own base, while amplifying our outreach to Independents and moderate Republicans. Our talking points should be as follows:
Sarah Palin Isn't Ready To Be Commander In Chief.
- She has been Governor for 18 months of a state that ranks 47th in population. Only North Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming have fewer people to govern than Alaska.
- Prior to that, she was Mayor of Wasilla, Alaka for 6 years and sat on Wasilla's City Council for 4 years. Wasilla's 2005 population estimate is 8,471.
- Sarah Palin has no foreign policy experience. Physical proximity of Alaska to Russia doesn't count.
Sarah Palin is woefully out of the mainstream in her views.
- She opposes abortion, even in cases of rape and incest. Only 18% of Americans agree with her that it should be illegal in all cases (source).
- She opposes sex education in schools and is firmly behind abstinence-only programs (source). 69% of Americans think sex education in schools is very important, and 21% think its somewhat important (source - PDF, p. 6).
- She supports the idea of "school choice", or vouchers (source). 70% of Americans do NOT support vouchers when it means public school funding would be cut (source).
- She supports teaching creationism in science classes (source).
- She is skeptical of global warming and doesn't believe climate change is man-made (source). 85% of Americans believe the planet is warming and a full 70% believe that it is attributable to either BOTH nature and man (49%) or solely to humans (21%) (source).
Palin is hardly free of old-Washington influence and tactics.
- She was FOR the Bridge to Nowhere, before she was against it (source).
- She openly praises Hillary Clinton, but thinks Clinton is a "whiner" (source).
- She is under investigation for ethics abuses in the firing of Alaska's Public Safety Director (source - worth noting also that CNN just reported Palin has retained a lawyer on the same issue).
- She was director of Senator Ted Stevens' PAC (source). It's worth noting here also that Stevens himself is under indictment for 7 felonious counts.
The rest of the things we're talking about with respect to Palin? Interesting - and certainly gripping - within our own closed circle. But our message to the outside world on Palin - as we canvass, talk to voters, friends and colleagues - should remain consistent.
She's not ready to lead.
She's out of the mainstream.
She's hardly free of "Old Washington" scandals and tactics.
I do believe this helps us influence the voters we need to ensure are our focus. We'll NEVER get the religious right to vote for Barack Obama. That's obvious. But we can use Palin's substantive stances on real issues - issues that matter to average voters - to ensure we never have to find out how she fares in staring down Vladimir Putin or a nuclear-armed Pakistan.