Thread: In defense of Sarah Palin

Hey, Martin. Sorry, should have quantified the post a little better. As a senator, Biden is really well known, but I don't think he's getting any more or less as the V.P. candidiot than Palin. I neglected to separate the two situations clearly. Sorry.

The first thing that comes to my mind is that the initial surprise effect was extremely strong and she became an overnight celebrity. But I doubt that the campaign was betting on that momentum to carry over for the next 60 days.
I believe they have a strategy and her being sequestered is part of that. I can only speculate why, but from the two interviews I've seen it seems that a major part is minimizing any possible damage (which will be amplified by her celebrity status). I think the idea is to rely on few strong and very orchestrated performances in front of a friendly public, and minimize any exposure to any kind of hostility.
My feeling is that the goal of the campaign is to win the election, even if that may not be the same thing as making the best long-term choices.
In any case she is the pick for a VP, not running for president, I would be more worried if the spotlight continues to be placed on her, or if shortly before the election she is catapulted again in another celebrity orbit. The discussion should be mostly who of the two candidates will make a better president, and their choice for the potential replacement is just plan B. In theory the better president will also have a better plan B, but as I said at this stage it seems that the campaign goal is to win the election no matter what.

I don't think this is the positive view you are looking for, but I don't think it's negative either.

When one of the candidates is 72 years old has had two bouts of melanoma his plan B has a lot of relevance? When he said he puts country before winning the election his choice of VP candidates sort of puts that in question too.