Update: McCain Selects Gov. Sarah Palin as Running Mate

I suppose it happens more often than not in politics though.

I guess so.

RNC in a minute:
c-OSvqOSQU0

Well, this is direct from the GOP platform

'Because our children’s future is best preserved within the traditional understanding of marriage, we call for a constitutional amendment that fully protects marriage as a union of a man and a woman, so that judges cannot make other arrangements equivalent to it. In the absence of a national amendment, we support the right of the people of the various states to
affirm traditional marriage through state initiatives."

And yes I realize that both McCain and Obama agree the issue should be decided by the states. My concern is with the party's overall position on it and, I believe, Sarah Palin's positions on issues such as those are what essentially pushed her onto the GOP ticket. But, and maybe I'm not just being clear about it, my beef isn't with McCain's position on the matter. What bothers me is that the party as a whole feels it's so important that it would basically threaten not to support McCain if he didn't appease them (apparently by selecting Palin)
Like I said he says its a state issue. The party as a whole has never said they would not back McCain because of his matter on this issue its the far right that had issues which is not the entire Rep party. Its just like the far left mad at Obama for now saying it will take 16 months to withdraw from Iraq and they have protested against him.

as recently as 2 weeks ago, John McCain had not uttered the word change, let alone used it for his platform. while i do agree the whole system is in dire need of one type of reform, or another, how can you just suddenly change your position, in mid election? he took what he thought the American people are clamouring for, and ran with it. smart move, but not legit. and lets talk about his voting record. he claims to be a maverick. got any proof? its easy to talk it. but walking it is a whole other story
His use of the word change is in the same context of what he has been saying all along and not a change in what he has been sayin he will do as president.

Like I said he says its a state issue. The party as a whole has never said they would not back McCain because of his matter on this issue its the far right that had issues which is not the entire Rep party. Its just like the far left mad at Obama for now saying it will take 16 months to withdraw from Iraq and they have protested against him.

My feeling is that the far right is a lot more influential on its party than the far left

My feeling is that the far right is a lot more influential on its party than the far left

I would completely disagree. I agree the far right influence has been a disaster for the Repubs but I think the far lefts influence is so ingrained and institutionalized that it no longer even appears as influence. It actually is the party. It has been going on since the 60's. The Repubs are catching up quick though.

The 25% of this country that would identify themselves as democrats but not in the context of their super liberal party get left out in the cold the same way the 25% of Repubs do.

Our country seems to align basically like this.

15 25 20 25 15

left to right.

the problem in both parties is that the 15 percenters run the show.

the 25 percenters are stuck voting for blobs like Kerry/GW because they can't support someone so opposed to their fundamental beliefs.

and the middle 20 percenters vote the guy they like the best regardless of politics.

we need to bust up the two party system something fierce. it is killing us.

But doesn't seem like as the election has proceeded, both candidates have shifted toward the right of their originally stated positions? Implying that the far right is more influential.

I honestly don't know how anyone who voted for George Bush twice can actually look at themselves in the mirror and say "I voted for a better America." What a disaster. It's not just my opinion. The man has the lowest approval rating of any President.
Ever. Well done. Go Palin.


It is true that Bush has the "lowest approval rating ever". However:


1. Presidential Approval Rating Polls were not taken until the mid to late 1930s, which means you're leaving out some really bad Presidents.

2. While Bush's 19% number from American Research Group is the "lowest approval rating ever, the average of his numbers in any given week are unlikely to be lower than Harry Truman's 22% number from 1952 when only one organization (Gallup) was doing the polling. George W. Bush has never been lower than 28% in the Gallup poll. Furthermore the American Research Group's numbers for Bush are consistently lower than everyone else's. If you go to their website (http://americanresearchgroup.com/) and look at their numbers, they're all over the place month to month which should cause some concerns as to their methodology. For instance, last month Bush was at 21% in their poll and this month he is at 30%.

3. By following the "lowest approval rating ever" logic, it should be pointed out that Bush also has the "highest approval rating ever" of 92% after 9/11, and Bush's average number throughout his two terms is 50% in the Gallup poll.

I would completely disagree. I agree the far right influence has been a disaster for the Repubs but I think the far lefts influence is so ingrained and institutionalized that it no longer even appears as influence. It actually is the party. It has been going on since the 60's. The Repubs are catching up quick though.

The 25% of this country that would identify themselves as democrats but not in the context of their super liberal party get left out in the cold the same way the 25% of Repubs do.

Our country seems to align basically like this.

15 25 20 25 15

left to right.

the problem in both parties is that the 15 percenters run the show.

the 25 percenters are stuck voting for blobs like Kerry/GW because they can't support someone so opposed to their fundamental beliefs.

and the middle 20 percenters vote the guy they like the best regardless of politics.

we need to bust up the two party system something fierce. it is killing us.


I think the country shakes out this way:

99.99999% Usually Wrong or "Everyone Else" vs.

.00001% Always Right or "Me"

It is true that Bush has the "lowest approval rating ever". However:


1. Presidential Approval Rating Polls were not taken until the mid to late 1930s, which means you're leaving out some really bad Presidents.

2. While Bush's 19% number from American Research Group is the "lowest approval rating ever, the average of his numbers in any given week are unlikely to be lower than Harry Truman's 22% number from 1952 when only one organization (Gallup) was doing the polling. George W. Bush has never been lower than 28% in the Gallup poll. Furthermore the American Research Group's numbers for Bush are consistently lower than everyone else's. If you go to their website (http://americanresearchgroup.com/) and look at their numbers, they're all over the place month to month which should cause some concerns as to their methodology. For instance, last month Bush was at 21% in their poll and this month he is at 30%.

3. By following the "lowest approval rating ever" logic, it should be pointed out that Bush also has the "highest approval rating ever" of 92% after 9/11, and Bush's average number throughout his two terms is 50% in the Gallup poll.

All good points