T Nation

'Swiftboating' Palin?

As opponents of Palin are trying to figure out how to “counter” her growing popularity and the momentum she has given the McCain campaign; I was reading where someone suggested “Swiftboating” her.

(Without going into a lot of details, this refers to getting together people who actually know, worked with and/or socialized with someone to counter their arguments, and most importantly, their image. It comes from the “Swift Boat Veterans for Truth”, (SBVT), and that group’s widely publicized campaign against 2004 Presidential candidate John Kerry).

It won’t work.

Kerry simply didn’t have a large number of Americans who sincerely loved him and identified with him (like is becoming very clear with Palin as she is on the stump).

Someone said attacking Palin for many voters is like attacking a single Mom holding down a Wal-Mart and a Housecleaning job to make ends meet; while caring for five kids (one with special needs); because her cloths are worn and her hair is messy.

The attack will come back to the attacker 100-fold.

Is Palin this protected and “bullet-proof”?

CAN she be “Swiftboated”?

Is Palin BORG?

Thoughts?

Mufasa

BORG? hahaha.

I think she might be able to be swiftboated. If you dig deep enough, you’ll almost always find people who disagree with someone and used to know them personally. Many times they’ll be willing to go on record as well, perhaps if compensated… it’s schadenfreude to some degree. I don’t know if it will be effective or not. It’s a dangerous gamble to play however, since if it backfires the consequences will be catastrophic.

It depends on what they find. With Politicians there’s always something, it just depends on what’s there.

I’m inclined at this point to think there won’t be anything serious enough to be effective, but I’ve learned not to assume anything. It’s what we don’t hear until the last week that scares me.


On a completely separate note, every time I see a picture of John Kerry I think I’m seeing Treebeard’s great-great-great-great-great- great-great-great-great-great-great-great-descendent.

I can’t help it.

49% of voters voted for a man (?) who chose to wear that lipstick?

Very metrosexual.

This is what has happened so far:

  1. There has been one Alaskan Biologist/Environmentalist who was on the news against Palin. (He looked, and came off like some Unibomber living in a shed in the Alaskan Wilderness. In other words, he came off bad).

  2. Most of her “enemies” APPEAR to be other Politicians.

It appears to me when voters (especially women) refer to her on the stump as “their sister”; that voter ain’t gonna’ give a flip about what a Politician has to say.

Mufasa

You know, it’s sad actually. The Liberals planted a squad over in Alaska the day after she was announced as VP.

They’re taking whatever bone is thrown at them. The funny part is that the Lib Media will run these stories without even verifying them…and then it eventually backfires for them like you said. They’ve got to be careful.

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
49% of voters voted for a man (?) who chose to wear that lipstick?

Very metrosexual.[/quote]

? =]

[quote]Mufasa wrote:

It appears to me when voters (especially women) refer to her on the stump as “their sister”; that voter ain’t gonna’ give a flip about what a Politician has to say.

Mufasa[/quote]

This politician may have something to say which is “flippable…”

The American undecided electorate has an average attention span of about 7 minutes. The so called swifboat tactic was effective because they dribbled it out and dropped the bomb at the last minute making it the freshest thing on voters minds before going to the polls.

The encouraging thing is I don’t know if the Dems are patient or competent enough to gamble on waiting if they dig up something substantial and unless it’s REALLY substantial it won’t stick for long. The all important female voters absolutely love this woman in significant numbers and females being as they are, they may not be as easily swayed by even legitimate dirt if they like somebody that much. Unless like I say, It’s REALLY substantial. I may get clobbered for that comment, but there is a point there.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
The American undecided electorate has an average attention span of about 7 minutes. The so called swifboat tactic was effective because they dribbled it out and dropped the bomb at the last minute making it the freshest thing on voters minds before going to the polls.

The encouraging thing is I don’t know if the Dems are patient or competent enough to gamble on waiting if they dig up something substantial and unless it’s REALLY substantial it won’t stick for long. The all important female voters absolutely love this woman in significant numbers and females being as they are, they may not be as easily swayed by even legitimate dirt if they like somebody that much. Unless like I say, It’s REALLY substantial. I may get clobbered for that comment, but there is a point there.[/quote]

Yup tirib, them there female voters are almost as bad as us male voters in that regard.

Come on man, I like ya but that realm isn’t exclusive to our better halves… You have only to look at the microcosm that is this and other political forums.

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:
Mufasa wrote:

It appears to me when voters (especially women) refer to her on the stump as “their sister”; that voter ain’t gonna’ give a flip about what a Politician has to say.

Mufasa

This politician may have something to say which is “flippable…”


[/quote]

HO-LEE. SHIT.

Go Mike Gravel. That’s a good man right there. Makes no bones about the fact that he disagrees with Palin and McCain, but at least he’s intellectually honest and decent in his disagreement. I love it. Dude just hates everyone equally :).

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

I see what you’re saying, Tirib;

But for some reason, I just think that there is nothing major out there on Palin, or we would have heard SOMETHING (unless its a very close confidant).

Real world stuff:

I bring up Palin in the office (which is a about 90% women); faces light up; women smile; and the “just like us” thing goes on for an hour!

I seriously think that women will get the McCain/Palin ticket “over the hump”.

Mufasa

I think the real danger if there is one for her is that she hasn’t been vetted on a national stage yet. I don’t think anyone that identifies with her and uses that as a reason to vote for that ticket will be affected either way regardless of what comes out.

But the more that the Republican party leans on her and bills her as a true bulldog and a true reformer, the more scrutiny every little flip-flop and every little earmark will come under scrutiny.

If I were a republican, I would look at her as the less we know about her the better. Every politician is going to have a record that can be distorted so don’t oversell her and give the other party an opportunity to talk about the other side of that billing.

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
I seriously think that women will get the McCain/Palin ticket “over the hump”. [/quote]

That was the plan all along. And if you look at the McCain’s campaign reaction to Obama’s “lipstick on a pig”, it should be obvious that they’re willing to milk the women’s vote as much as possible.

Question is though, can women look past her stance on “choice”. Gals are generally not fond of conservative views.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
lixy wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
I seriously think that women will get the McCain/Palin ticket “over the hump”.

That was the plan all along. And if you look at the McCain’s campaign reaction to Obama’s “lipstick on a pig”, it should be obvious that they’re willing to milk the women’s vote as much as possible.

Exactly how stupid are you?

Each side in a political campaign will attempt to take every advantage that they can. Including “misspeaks” like the one Obama made. If you don’t know this by now get the fuck off the political forum…CLOWN.[/quote]

Have you noticed the lack of opposing opinions on the Political Forum lately? Here’s a perfect example of why - the first thing close to a dissenting opinion and you attack him like he’s personally insulted you.

If you want this forum to be a place where people share ideas and encourage open debate, you might want to tune down the vitriol.

However, if you’re all content to continue sucking each other’s political dicks, then by all means continue.

[quote]BabyBuster wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
lixy wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
I seriously think that women will get the McCain/Palin ticket “over the hump”.

That was the plan all along. And if you look at the McCain’s campaign reaction to Obama’s “lipstick on a pig”, it should be obvious that they’re willing to milk the women’s vote as much as possible.

Exactly how stupid are you?

Each side in a political campaign will attempt to take every advantage that they can. Including “misspeaks” like the one Obama made. If you don’t know this by now get the fuck off the political forum…CLOWN.

Have you noticed the lack of opposing opinions on the Political Forum lately? Here’s a perfect example of why - the first thing close to a dissenting opinion and you attack him like he’s personally insulted you.

If you want this forum to be a place where people share ideas and encourage open debate, you might want to tune down the vitriol.

However, if you’re all content to continue sucking each other’s political dicks, then by all means continue.

[/quote]

They don’t want open debate. That is why so many people have stopped even reading this forum. There was nothing wrong with what Lixy wrote yet he gets jumped no matter what he writes as if he just killed someone’s mother.

That shit got old about two years ago.

It’s a right-wing circle jerk over here.

At times, I find it fascinating.

This forum used to be a lot better.