Prospect theory and vice-presidential nominees

Kristol, naturally, thinks says he thinks Palin is a risk that will pay off.

Fixed.

Dan, putting you on the Republican ticket would have been a risk-loving decision. It might have been tough for you to reach voters who believe in their hearts, after all we've seen over the past eight years, that the 2008 Presidential election is really all about abortion.

Gov. Palin has that one wired. She knows all the right things to say, and knows (or can be pointed toward) all the right people to say them to. A lot of these folks have never liked John McCain, and they are safely in his corner now. Not that this will get him elected President or anything; it might even hurt him with voters who don't prize pro-life posing over issues involving things like the economy or national security. But it will keep the Republican base together, even as that size of that base appears to be shrinking somewhat under the pressure of all the things the Republican administration has screwed up since 2001.

Perhaps on reflection your first impressions will change. When I first heard the announcement, I was unsure whether her nomination made sense. Having watched as many of the videos of her interviews as I could find, I think she will be terrific. Her poise and self-confidence come through, but without any of the self-absorbed "I am the One" stuff surrounding O. She is delightfully normal and serious at the same time. Would that her critics could say the same about themselves. And on the energy issues, I suspect she will run circles around Biden. In the showdown between the Beauty Queen and the Old Windbag, my money is on her.

It's odd that you should link to a story about her daughter's pregnancy, as if that will have any significance beyond the wackiest of the Kos-kids. The idea that conservative voters will react to that story by sitting on their hands or voting for Team O is too improbable even for the most rabid Dem "analysts" such as Begala or Lanny Davis. Instead, watch for McCain to take on Team O on its claim to represent "change," and to point out that (unlike Palin) O has thrived in Chicago politics by being a get-along-by-going-along pol, a man who never once took on the sources of corruption or the powers-that-be who maintained that system, just as he somehow slept through all of the Rev Wright's wacky sermons (at least when it was in O's interest to go along with them as well). McCain means to take this campaign to O, and not just be the guy with the looks and experience of what O would call the "typical candidate" for president. The next 60 days promise to be the most interesting election in decades, and McCain's pick of Palin made it even more so.

I'm not buying it. Gambling for gambling's sake is an awful idea. It's like McCain picking a random person to be his VP and saying, "Yes it's risky, but he HAD to try something!"

I am amazed at the quality of the spin offered to justify Palin's candidacy. I sincerely hope that she fails and fails miserably. Its the only way to wrest control of the Republic party from Christian conservatives.

Listening to conservatives attempt a labored justification for Palin is painful to watch. I understand the need to stand by the party and hopefully take a job in a potential republican administration - but its embarrassing.

We are at the tail end of a disastrous Bush Presidency and there are no reservations whatsoever at a Palin candidacy on the same scale with Harriet Myers nomination for the Supreme Court.

I am done with this party!

Yes, this was a high stakes gamble. But if it is change you want, real change, not the kind people with BSD want, then this could be the real deal. As to vetting, the jury is still out, but at this point what has she done ( that we know) that renders her any more lacking in judgment than Obama's 20 year relationship with Wright and his long relationship with Ayers? Pregnant daughter? How many Americans can identify with that? It is the inside the beltway snobs who are making the biggest stink over this selection. They can't grasp how a beer drinking, moose stew cooking, NRA member woman could possibly be in line for the cocktail circuit.

This is a fantastic pick... unless something happens to McCain.

I believe that everything came out during the vetting process and they rolled with it anyway. She will be a fantastic campaigner who will connect with a lot of people in the middle while energizing the conservative base.

The great unknown is what if she actually has to serve as President. Will her style lend itself to big decision making on a presidential scale.

"Let he who is without sin..."

The early polling would seem to indicate that she does the worst with the groups McCain most needs -- those who have not yet made up their minds (per a Rasmussen poll) and those who supported Clinton. These polls are still really early, but all he seems to have done is to shore up the evangelical base.

I think Democrats do themselves a disservice by focusing on her inexperience. They seem to ignore Rove's politics 101 -- attack your opponents strengths. Every Republican pundit I've heard over the last few days has used Palin (incorrectly, in my view) to argue why her experience is so much better than Obama's. Interestingly, they point that her experience is in the governor's office, giving her executive experience, something Obama doesn't have, neglecting that McCain doesn't either.

No, as with many things, the simple answer is best -- Clinton supporters in early polling don't like Palin because 1) they saw it as pandering on a grand scale; and 2) the average Clinton supporter disagrees with pretty much all of Palin's positions. Not surprisingly, conservative Republican women like the pick.

Put me in the camp, however, that thinks VP picks are over-hyped. The person at the top is calling the shots; if you like that person's pattern of decision-making, and, as importantly, whom they have chosen as advisors, pick that one. Those who like McCain's policies and his various teams of advisors should vote for him, regardless of Palin. Those who like Obama and his advisors should vote for him.

And experience is a red herring -- nothing truly prepares you for the presidency. Some of our best presidents have had very little experience in elective office, some of our least successful have been groomed for the office for years.

I like the pick, myself, for reasons that are similar to ones David Brooks noted. Palin -- as Zathras notes above -- makes the fundamentalist base very happy based on decisions regarding abortion that she made. But at the same time, her record is very reformand has put her at odds against some old lions in the party. McCain got himself an unexpected twofer -- someone he's likely comfortable with, combined with a personal history that makes the religious right -- who is predisposed to despise McCain -- feel unexpectedly happy.

I do hope the McCain people did vet Palin's personal Troopergate scandal. Because, if there is a true problem there (as opposed to local politicians blowing smoke -- or, this being Alaska -- weed) the nomination will likely blow up.

Still can't see voting for McCain though. Just glad this election might not be a Dem blowout.

Guys,

Lets get real. This is BAD for McCain and for the Republicans. Trying to spin this comes off truly as bull, as is achingly obvious every time a republican is interviewed about Palin. The media smells blood in the water and there will be a feeding frenzy.

I was willing to give Palin a look see and did so. The aura of a fringe personality is the impression I get. She clearly leans toward the extreme and for me, and I suspect to others like myself, any positives that her biography and on-camera/stump persona provides cannot obscure this.

A true reformist, fiscal conservative female governor would have helped McCain. Alas, it is clear Palin is not one of these mythical beings.

I say Palin is DOA.

Moderate Ex:

Where do you see the "extreme"? Is it more extreme, say, than belonging to Jeremiah Wright's church?

All I can say is:
Welcome to our new Commander-of-the-Alaskan-National-Guard Overlords!

Appalled,

From my point of view as a moderate, the following are extreme/fringe views:

**Membership in the Alaska Independence Party which apparently wants out of the US

**Against abortion even in the event of rape/incest

**Attempts to ban books that contain "incorrect" language

**Denial of global warming as man-made

**Dictating the teaching of creationism in public schools

Not an exhaustive list, but some of the reasons why I am uncomfortable with her and consider her extreme/fringe.

I am all for reform and fiscal conservatism (which is something I support and was one of the reasons why I was a republican).

I was thrilled, Palin is obviously bright, young and energetic. She's an accomplished speaker, with a no-nonsense attitude. Can't verify it but I have a sense that McCain was sitting back with his fingers crossed hoping Obama would not pick Hillary as his running mate and open the door for the Repulicans to break some barriers of their own with this election. The next few months will certainly be interesting.

The voters whom McCain most needs are living in Colorado, Michigan and Ohio. We'll see what the polls say - IMHO this was a home run in reaching out to them. Palin's got solid small-town blue-collar credentials, a libertarian/leave-me-alone streak and chops on energy to allow McCain to reverse himself on ANWR drilling (it's what the people in Alaska want, after all. As mentioned, she also reaches out to disaffected Hillary supporters and social conservatives who weren't excited about McCain.

Also, by all means let Obama keep contrasting his experience to the VP candidate. Let's keep that experience debate going as long as possible. The GOP might just pull this one out yet...

[...] IMHO, a melhor frase sobre o veepstake até agora é do Daniel Drezner: [...]

The total absence of vetting here does not give me confidence that McCain thought this through.

I can only hope that one day the GOP will return the party to people like yourself.

While I might not always agree with you on the issues, I have always enjoyed reading your take on things.

Conservatism is a great political philosophy; the sooner it can be reclaimed from the religious right Palin represents the sooner we can return to a two party system that serves the people effectively.

Pete Burgess:
So it is okay that she was, at least sympathized with, and likely involved with(we know her husband only became a registered Republican in 2002 when she first ran for statewide office), the Alaska Independence Party. If you don't know about it, I suggest you read up on it. It's not about what kids Palin's daughter has. It's about McCain's judgment. How he barely even interviewed Palin. Do you want a reckless president? We've already had eight years of one. I don't want any more.

The obtuseness of the Dem talking points - and those who mindlessly parrot them - is really quite amusing.

Read this for some background on Alaska politics and the AEI: http://radio.weblogs.com/0134204/2008/08/29.html#a309

Read this for evidence that McCain had been vetting Palin since at least late May: http://www.wizbangblog.com/content/2008/05/29/alaska-gov-sarah-palin-to-meet-with-mccain-vp-search-team.php

Here's a good article arguing Palin is as close to a libertarian as we're going to get from one of the major parties: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/the_libertarian_case_for_palin.html

The critiques sound bitter, and uninformed - which generally means desperate. Keep it up though, at least for the entertainment value.