” A 47 year-old man, who first won statewide office in 2004,”
Ummm.. don’t you mean won NATIONAL office in 2004? He won “statewide” office in 1997.

John McCain’s first important presidential decision was one driven by politics purely. It is an electoral gambit, and has nothing at all to do with governing. She is a trophy running mate. Does anyone believe that she would have been the pick if she were a man?
Compared to Obama’s pick especially, this demonstrates that McCain is far more interested in winning this election than he is concerned about what is best for the country.
As for the electoral argument, to the extent this pick takes the experience issue off of the table, that is a disaster for McCain.

umm.. sorry to have to clarify, but I got thrown off by the term “statewide”.
Obama won *state office* (state senate) in 1997 and served seven years, winning *NATIONAL* office in 2004 (in a *statewide election*). He has never held a “statewide office*.
Palin won *statewide* office (governor) in 2006.
Not trying to make any point about the value of their relative experience except to point out that United States Senator is not a statewide office and does bring with it at least some national experience (including foreign affairs), just as you say Governor brings executive experience.

Clarification for any College Democrats who might be reading: obviously I meant his or herself in my comment above.

Err, “governor.”

The liberals can split hairs over what constitutes “experience”. However you want to define it, McCain has it and Obama does not, and people don’t elect vice-presidents.

I think it’s way too early to determine whether Gov. Palin’s selection was a brilliant tactic or a foolish risk.
I don’t really question her qualifications to step in for Pres. McCain should the need arise . . . she’s been a Mayor and Governor and she’s the mother of five kids — you think she’s gonna confront something in the White House that she can’t handle?
I’m more dubious about her ability to navigate smoothly through the short-run national campaign that lies ahead in the next two months, given her lack of national political experience.
The first job of a VP candidate is to help the ticket win. The best VP candidates in my memory — Mondale in ’76, Bush in ’80, and Cheney in ’00 — all had substantial experience in high-level jobs or campaigns.
Have Gov. Palin’s political battles in her home state prepared her for what she now faces?
I certainly hope so, but I have no idea.

Hey, Palin has it all over Obama on foreign policy, according to Steve Doocy from Fox & Friends, an impeccable source if ever there was.
Steve’s right – Palin’s stronger on foreign policy because she lives much closer to Russia than Obama does.

Here is an interesting observation from an RI Future commentor:
“Let’s face it – any white guy with Obama’s experience would be a laughingstock”
I couldn’t have said it better myself.

Palin is an unbelievably good pick. Everyone I’ve talked to today has been anywhere from elated to giddy — I mean like 100% approval. We don’t get that on anything. As for this from your original post: “Can YOU imagine Sarah Palin one heartbeat away from the White House.” Yes! Which is why I’m thrilled by the choice. I’ve actually researched her in the past, but I though she was a real dark horse (and I was right). She has considerable real-life experience, which I think a lot of Americans — especially women — will be able to relate to. She didn’t have to plagiarize her biography, unlike another VP candidate. She’s the only candidate on both tickets with any executive experience. She also has 13 years experience in elective office (city council, mayor, governor). That’s actually more than Obama. 😉 Let’s put it all out there. Let’s say that Senator McCain is elected President this November, and a year or two into his term, he has the “big one” — then what do we have? Conservatives have “one of their own” in the White House, and American women have the first female President. That’s not a risk, that’s what I call an insurance policy. On a similar note, John McCain turned 72 on Friday. If he is elected President, in 4 years, he would be 76 (I’m a math whiz, you know). I think it fairly unlikely that he would seek reelection in 2012, which puts Gov. Palin in excellent position to be elected President in 2012 (perhaps running against Hillary?). That just may be the reason why he chose her, because in many ways, she would continue where he left off. PS As for the quote: “Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000… Read more »

Andrew et al.,
Perhaps you should read Ramesh Ponnuru at NR Online for an honest conservative take on Palin. “Governor for two minutes” etc. etc.
So your argument Andrew is that it is not legit to raise Palin’s lack of experience because of Obama’s? Ok, then, objectively speaking, is she ready?
No. On another note, has she ever — even once — made a single comment about the war in Iraq? The war on terror? NATO? China? Anything? Bueller? Bueller?
Obama may not have been on the national scene for long, but his views are out in the public sphere for all to judge. Oh, and by the way, he was right about Iraq from the beginning. And foreign policy expert McCain has 4,000 lives to answer for. Oh yeah, where exactly is Osama these days? Are we still celebrating a mission accomplished?
This was a disasterous pick.

The ad that was run by McCain during the Democratic Convention about Hillary Clinton being left off the ticket by the Democrats telegraphed McCain’s intention to put forward a woman,in this case Governor Palin. It’s rumored that Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson was also being considered. There’s a historical precedence for purely political considerations in the Vice Presidential selection usually with an eye towards winning large electoral states. So the heartbeat away from the presidency argument is not as important as some seem to think. Lyndon Johnson was elected as President after finishing the term of Kennedy and history sees his selection as VP to have been politically inspired. Gerald Ford of course had been a replacement for the disgraced VP of Richard Nixon and the country muddled through the time that Ford served as President after Nixon resigned. Ford had been forced on Nixon by the Republicans in Congress. Hell the country was strong enough to endure the eight years of the Reagan Presidency so we should not be as concerned about these Vice presidential choices in regards to the experience of lack of experience that they bring. What I find funny about the conservative reaction is their delight in the fact that Palin is “outside the Beltway” One of the comments here states that Alaska is as far from the Beltway as one can get or something like that forgetting that Sen. Ted Stevens of course is from Alaska and seemed to have also been familiar with the Beltway and the ways of Washington. Being familiar with Washington is of course what Governor Palin will have to do if elected. This is one area that the question of experience seems to more of a risk for McCain. The last two Vice Presidents (Gore and Cheney) were helpful to their… Read more »

Obama WAS WRONG about Iraq.
If Obama had been elected president in 2000, we’d still be dealing with Saddam Hussein. If Obama had been elected in 2004, we would have handed Iraq over to al-Qaeda at the height of their power.
Despite Obama’s “emphasis” on Afghanistan, he never held a single hearing on Afghanistan, even though his subcommittee had jurisdiction on the Foreign Relations Committee.
Maybe he never had the time, because Obama has only spent about 140 working DAYS in the Senate.
Would I feel comfortable with Palin walking in as president? No, not really. But she’s more qualified than Obama and he’s is the one running for president.
IF YOU WANT TO MAKE THIS A CAMPAIGN ABOUT EXPERIENCE, BRING IT ON!

Nice Summary, Andrew.
“There is no historical basis for suggesting that being a Senator counts for more than being a Governor, just because the Senate job is Federal.”
Agreed. Is somebody arguing otherwise?

The Shock Of Palin 31 Aug 2008 10:22 am Non-movement conservatives may well have this reaction: I’ve voted a straight Republican ticket every year of my life since 1975, when I first came of voting age, but I was stunned and horrified by McCain’s choice of Palin. I simply cannot even consider voting for McCain after this choice, which speaks loudly of his own selfishness and fundamental frivolousness. So I was shocked when I turned to the conservative blogs looking for others who shared my dismay and found a celebration going on. They really honestly believe that Palin’s “inexperience” and Obama’s “inexperience” are equivalent. I have had no luck at all in the past 24 hours trying to explain that Obama is quite obviously an impressive man (with whom I disagree on almost every major issue) with extraordinary qualities of organization, discipline and leadership. I see nothing in Palin’s record to suggest that she has any such qualities. He is a man who has spent his adult life thinking serious thoughts about serious issues and having serious conversations about them with other serious, well-informed people; while Palin quite as clearly has done none of those things. He was the president of the Harvard Law Review; she was the point guard on her high school basketball team. He has surrounded himself in his campaign with world-class people (with whom, again, I disagree on almost every issue); and though I am doubtless an elitist and snob for saying so, I doubt that she has even met a half-dozen world-class people in her lifetime. While Obama might do a hundred things as President that I believe are bad for the country, I am confident that he would surround himself with experienced, informed, competent advisors and that he would make no world-destroying blunders. I… Read more »