proximoception | (no subject)

I'm not very happy about the Palin business, and I'll use folksy metaphors to explain why not. She was much more dangerous as a vice presidential candidate. Palin's like a dog whistle or something, her 'folksiness' works only on the biologically predisposed - I suspect she'd have been a wonderful lightning rod, keeping the nomination away from Huckabee. Free extra points for Obama in the general election, now gone up in smoke. Now Huckabee, who I genuinely fear, is going to get most of her chips. Huckabee has a charisma that works on me - not to any effect on my actions or opinions, but even when he's preaching the most hideous, potentially murdersome wrongness I'm horrified to find I rather like him, whereas Palin I could never stand. What he has will work on underinformed independents (if that isn't redundant) - especially if he keeps watching Bob Roberts for tips. He is therefore the devil, and, the future being who knows what, conceivably more dangerous than Bush. Big war daddy McCain blocked him last time, lil' darlin' Palin looked set to in '12. Nobody now.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

See, I felt this way about Reagan. When he got the nomination (which Carter worked hard to get him), we all thought: great, now Carter wins, sucky as he's been. And then we got Reagan. And so this time I thought: worth the slam dunk likelihood that Obama would beat Palin to risk the 5% chance that she'd win? And the answer is, no. I think Huckabee may be a problem. But Palin so lowers expected gain (so increases expected loss) in any election she's part of, that I prefer Huckabee.

I don't see the same flames and Carmina Burana behind her eyes. But yeah, glassy nothingness may not be preferable.