My wife and I talked about that last night. I was thinking the author did a great job writing the speech, but wondered how well that author could deliver the speech given the circumstances. I envisioned a somewhat introverted person sitting at a computer, and exclaiming YES! every time a key point was driven home by the speaker.

I can almost guarantee you, you're dead on accurate.

I don't see anything that Obama has taken the lead on here...except his two books.

 

So now we only give credit if its a singluar author? So McCain doesn't get any credit (whether you agree with the bill or not) for McCain/Feingold? No credit for going across the aisle?

 

I realize this takes away from the euphoria of last night but to ignore the truth seems a bit immature.

I don't see anything that Obama has taken the lead on here...except his two books.

 

...and of all I listed that's all you can come up with? Telling.

Here is a very interesting article from the Detroit Free Press. They gathered a group of likely voters - Republican, Democrat, and independent - had them watch the speech and then give their reaction. Republicans loved it, Democrats hated it. But, read the comments by the independents.

 

"Sarah Palin came across as the small town girl who made good. I knew that I disagreed with her on some issues before this evening. After listening to her speech … it appears that once she makes up her mind, that is the end of it. We live in a gray world, not every answer is black and white.”

 

-- Diane Murphy, 42, Sterling Heights independent

 

“I was completely underwhelmed. She was a Republican novelty act with a sophomoric script. It was not even a speech I would expect for a someone running for the local PTA, much less for vice president.”

 

-- George Lentz, 66, Southfield independent

 

“Who is Sarah Palin? I'm sorry but I still don't know anymore about this young lady tonight than I did last night ... The way it looks to me, she's the Republican vice presidential nominee for one reason: because Hillary wasn't selected.”

 

-- Mike Kosh, 38, West Bloomfield independent

 

"Sarah Palin is a self-described ‘pitbull with lipstick.’ She spent little time helping Americans learn who she is. She is a cool, poised speaker, but her speech contained few statements about policy or the party platform. … I am not convinced that Palin's experience as a mayor or governor in Alaska meet the qualifications to be vice president much less one stroke or heart attack away from being commander in chief.”

 

-- Ilene Beninson, 52, Berkley independent

 

“Nothing worked for me. I found her barrage of snide remarksand distortions to be a major turn off. She is not a class act. The most important point she made is that she will be an effective attack dog.”

 

-- Jan Wheelock, 58, Royal Oak independent

 

“Sarah got as much applause as Hillary did, and had a friendly, appealing appearance.

Her delivery style reminded me of a high school valedictorian who also might have been a cheerleader. I thought she would appear more professional, more stateswomanly. She's no match for Joe Biden.”

 

-- Joellen Gilchrist, 64, Beverly Hills independent

 

 

Interesting. Even if you discount the inaccuracies I was still concerned about the tone - the condescencion . I don't know if I would have belittled Obama for his community organizer role. Not because of how Obama would feel about it but , rather, about how the folks who are community organizers and who are helped by community organizers would feel.

 

You can't get on Obama for his "small town mayor" comment and THEN come out and belittle community organizers and those that depend on them.

 

I'd be curious to hear/read a body language/speech expert. There was a tone there and a look given in some points of the speech that I think would be viewed negatively by those not already behind one party or the other.

Unless I missed it, one point not mentioned here is Palins appeal to the people who have special needs kids in their lives. Any opinions on her reaching out to them. I think it will make a difference to a lot of people.

Here is a very interesting article from the Detroit Free Press. They gathered a group of likely voters - Republican, Democrat, and independent - had them watch the speech and then give their reaction.

I seriously question whether these are really "independents."

 

According to a recent investigation into political contributions by media outlets:

 

(D) Detroit Free Press, Susan Hall-Balduf, copy editor, $300 to John Kerry in July 2004. Now editing news copy, she gave when she was in features.

 

(D) Detroit Free Press, Joel Thurtell, reporter, $500 to the Michigan Democratic State Central Committee in September 2004.

I seriously question whether these are really "independents."

 

According to a recent investigation into political contributions by media outlets:

 

(D) Detroit Free Press, Susan Hall-Balduf, copy editor, $300 to John Kerry in July 2004. Now editing news copy, she gave when she was in features.

 

(D) Detroit Free Press, Joel Thurtell, reporter, $500 to the Michigan Democratic State Central Committee in September 2004.

 

No suprise there. Anyone who takes any of the media garbage at face value will be sorely misguided.

She's hot.

Unless I missed it, one point not mentioned here is Palins appeal to the people who have special needs kids in their lives. Any opinions on her reaching out to them. I think it will make a difference to a lot of people.

 

Good question and one I considered last night.

 

It can't hurt but I'm not sure how much it helps.

 

Do we have Presidents that are not for the needs of these children?

 

How many undecideds are there that fall into this category?

She's hot.

 

To be totally sexist I must say that the hair down look is much better. While I'm in this "pit" I'd also say she would look much better sans jacket.

I seriously question whether these are really "independents."

 

According to a recent investigation into political contributions by media outlets:

 

(D) Detroit Free Press, Susan Hall-Balduf, copy editor, $300 to John Kerry in July 2004. Now editing news copy, she gave when she was in features.

 

(D) Detroit Free Press, Joel Thurtell, reporter, $500 to the Michigan Democratic State Central Committee in September 2004.

 

Question it all you want (and that $800 is hardly evidence of anything), but her nomination and this convention were not geared to winning over independents. This affirms it.

I seriously question whether these are really "independents."

 

According to a recent investigation into political contributions by media outlets:

 

(D) Detroit Free Press, Susan Hall-Balduf, copy editor, $300 to John Kerry in July 2004. Now editing news copy, she gave when she was in features.

 

(D) Detroit Free Press, Joel Thurtell, reporter, $500 to the Michigan Democratic State Central Committee in September 2004.

 

You are a classic, BF. Two people from DETROIT (not exactly a Red area) gave money to the Dems and you immediately disqualify anything they report on.

Edited September 4, 200818 yr by bugatti

Good question and one I considered last night.

 

It can't hurt but I'm not sure how much it helps.

 

Do we have Presidents that are not for the needs of these children?

 

How many undecideds are there that fall into this category?

 

I haven't really heard the issue addressed at this level. Of course a President is not going to say they are not for the needs of these people. And by needs I mean not only the children, but the parents, the caregivers, and the specialists that work with these kids. I have a feeling this may be a larger demographic than you realize.

You are a classic, BF. Two people from DETROIT (not exactly a Red area) gave money to the Dems and you immediately disqualify anything they report on.

 

Textbook fallacious argument.

Question it all you want (and that $800 is hardly evidence of anything), but her nomination and this convention were not geared to winning over independents. This affirms it.

I am confused as to why a lot of people on this website don't agree with that statement. I am in agreement with you 100% that the RNC has not been geared to independents.

 

Where we digress is that I think getting conservatives is more important than getting moderates this election. But I agree with your post.