Subscribe via RSS Feed

Palin: Favors Wasteful Spending — If It’s Your Money

[ 12 ] August 30, 2008 |

Brad Plumer has the goods on claims that Palin was opposed to the Bridge To Nowhere. She favored it, in the fine Alaska Republican tradition of joyous lunches at the federal trough:

…it sure looks like she was fine with the bridge in principle, never had a problem with the earmarks, bristled at all the mockery, and only gave up on the project when it was clear that federal support wasn’t forthcoming.

Being opposed to ridiculous boondoggles only if you have to pay for them is, er, not “anti-pork.”

As two separate friends mentioned to me today, one thing to take from picking Palin is that McCain’s internal polling must be terrible. Just as Biden is a good frontrunner pick, Palin only makes sense if you think it’s worth a considerable risk that your pick will be a complete catastrophe because with a safe pick you’re going to lose anyway, so you might as well be “bold” and hope you catch lightning in a bottle. I’m not saying that’s a good reason, but they can’t be optimistic.


Comments (12)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Matt Weiner says:

    I don’t know, your argument that McCain’s internals are terrible is that this pick makes no sense otherwise. But isn’t it possible that McCain did something that makes no sense, because he’s a fool?

  2. jsg says:

    Yeah I feel like we’re back in the mid-point of Bush II, Term II.
    “Surely they must have some sort of plan. No one in high office could be this stupid. Otherwise they’d be like a bunch of dumb college kids playing a lot of stupid pranks.”
    Well guess what?
    Please remember that the GOP forgot their big problem with carpetbagging so they could send Keyes to run against Obama. Now they’re running Palin to pick up Clinton’s supporters.
    I mean, they’re both women right?
    Yes. They really are that stupid.

  3. mike.timonin says:

    “with a safe pick you’re going to lose anyway, so you might as well be “bold” and hope you catch lightning in a bottle.”
    Wasn’t it this kind of thinking that got Ferraro nominated in ’84? Not that Ferraro didn’t have other qualities that made her a viable candidate, but some of the thinking was “we can’t beat Regan, so we might as well be bold.”

  4. eric says:

    So, in summary, Palin was for the Bridge to Nowhere before she was against it?

  5. DrDick says:

    Campaigning on opposition to pork and wasteful spending while gorging at the federal trough is a fine old Western Republican tradition. Here in Montana, they have made it rather an art form.

  6. bayville says:

    Palin describes herself as an “average hockey mom” and former PTA member…’
    Well it seems she’s a natural to succeed President Cheney as the Second-in-Command in the War On Terror.

  7. Rob says:

    The really big problem McCain had is that the Republican bench is bare after 8 years of Bush mismanagement. Anyone tied to the administration was poison and Congress isn’t better and as old as McCain. So you’re left with Romney who nobody likes, Giuliani which makes McCain have even bigger problems with Christian Conservatives, Bobby Jindal who is crazy, Mike Huckabee who the money interests don’t like,and Joe Lieberman who needs a job before he gets kicked out by his state.

  8. howard says:

    to pick up on matt weiner’s point, here’s an account from abc:
    opening grafs:
    “ABC’s Jan Crawford Greenburg reports: It wasn’t until Sunday night that John McCain, after meeting with his four top advisers, finally decided he could not tap independent Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut to be his running mate. One adviser, tasked with taking the temperature of the conservative base, had strongly made the case to McCain that it would be a disaster for the party and that the base would revolt. McCain concluded he could not go that route.
    The next day, McCain studied the three men at the top of his shortlist: Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge. All had different strengths and negatives, but McCain was not satisfied. None of them had what McCain believed he needed to do — and would have done — with Lieberman.
    McCain wanted to shake up the ticket.”
    PS. could be his internals are bad as well, but basically, as matt weiner said, it appears that he made the pick because he’s a fool.

  9. Matt Weiner says:

    It really is amazing. Lieberman and Palin are polar (hee hee) opposites in every way. The only way they could be your top two choices is if your number one priority was to make a big headline with your mavericky McMaverickness. Could he send a louder signal that he doesn’t care about actually governing?

  10. Mike says:

    It really is amazing. Lieberman and Palin are polar (hee hee) opposites in every way.
    Nonsense, They’d both be worse presidents than NcCain.

  11. phil says:

    Sarah Palin: Bobby Jindal wasn’t available, so they went with Harriet Miers.

  12. jonp72 says:

    Check out my mash-up of Palin & the Talking Heads “Road to Nowhere”

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.