GOP Purity Test

[Vampyr]

Originally Posted by Dylflon

Whoa dude...I don't think 'elitists' are afraid of her. I could not imagine her being politically threatening to anyone.

The reason people insult her is because she's an awful public speaker who comes off as quite dumb as she spits out buzz phrases and fails to answer the actual questions posed to her.

Who the hell are these "elitists" anyways? Is elitist is now a negative term used by Republicans to refer to educated people? I remember in the Obama run, when people brought up his education, Fox News would refer to him as an elitist. It's just another new buzz word that we'll hear used over and over again. And it's a shame because being smart should not have negative connotations.


I was actually surprised by your comment here, Bond.

Also: Being a simpleton is a negative thing in politics. Common sense, small town values, and a can-do maverick attitude should not qualify someone to be a politician. Not to say that these are bad things but they need to be coupled with intelligence and communicative abilities.

Haha, yeah, I like it when people to refer to Obama, or other people in general, as being part of the "intelligent, liberal elite" like it's a bad thing.

[Dylflon]

I'm actually really hoping Palin does run for president n 2012 solely because it would be super funny.

[Bond]

I realize now I did not properly explain my remarks. Let me try to make what I meant to say a little more clear, and hopefully this will alleviate some confusion.

I do not like Sarah Palin, on a personal or political level. I would not vote for her or support her in any election. McCain's choice of Palin as a running mate was one of the main reasons why I chose not to vote for McCain.

But my intention was not to voice my personal view on Palin, but rather how I viewed her coverage by the media, and more specifically The New Yorker.

Originally Posted by Dylflon

Who the hell are these "elitists" anyways? Is elitist is now a negative term used by Republicans to refer to educated people? I remember in the Obama run, when people brought up his education, Fox News would refer to him as an elitist. It's just another new buzz word that we'll hear used over and over again. And it's a shame because being smart should not have negative connotations.

I think you may have overly generalized my comment. I said, specifically:

What do elitists who write for The New Yorker and other such publications fear the most? The likable Republican. Hard to beat in an election. That being said, I like a lot of the elitists at The New Yorker, but it is important to look at the issue both ways.

I was specifically referencing certain persons who write for The New Yorker, a magazine that I read and listen to regularly. I was specifically thinking of Dorothy Wickenden, Hendrik Hertzberg, and Ryan Lizza, as the "elitists" I mentioned.

Now, I also do not attach a negative connotation to elitist, just as I do not attach a negative connotation to being a "commoner" or "common person." But, there are stark differences between the two, rarely can the two see eye-to-eye, and rarely can the two understand each other. What is not understood is often feared.

Edit: This inability to relate leads to my point of the elitist New Yorker writers fearing Sarah Palin, because she is a fairly popular political figure, especially in the more rural areas of our country. It is difficult for those political pundits I mentioned above to understand Palin's appeal because they cannot relate to her - just as I also cannot relate to her. Of course, I do not fear her, but I also do not have any sort of financial or other stake in politics.

[Bond]

Does that clear my position up?

[Typhoid]

4) She is an easy target with her accent and "folksiness".

In any case, she needs to diminish her publicly facing role in the party, if she cares about the health of her party. She attracts the social/religious base, but damages the attraction to moderates and fiscal Republicans and with the level of media scrutiny she attracts she is a distraction and prevents attention being made for real ideas to be presented by the GOP.

First off, I don't think she has an accent. Then again you're from the east coast and all.


I don't think it has anything to do with the health of the party anymore. She's not hurting Republicans at this point, just herself. She's slowly getting distance from the Republicans by doing what she's been doing for the past year and a half.

I think her main problem is that she's clearly playing up the "White middle class America" role. Constantly talking about how "normal" she is, and how she's just a "hockey mom" and "likes hunting like the typical Alaskan family" and things of the like. I would respect her more if she wasn't such a puppet to trying to get popular. She isn't normal. She was the head of a state. That immediately removes "normal" status.

At this point Sarah Palin is only hurting Sarah Palin. I don't think anyone associates the stupid things she says/gets caught on double-talking about with the Republican party anymore.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Bond

Does that clear my position up?

Yup, the only thing I'd say to that is that her role in you not voting for Mccain proves a point. She turns off people who really follow politics closely. If I'm only going to have two realistic choices, I'd prefer she not be one of them.

Though I do have a question for this topic, since you and prof both mentioned that Biden isn't qualified to be president. In your book, what does someone have to do to be qualified to be the president of the united states?