Nearly a day after Alaska Governor Sarah Palin made it clear she'll throw punches as the Republican nominee for Vice President, the Democrats are still playing it safe.
As we mentioned in yesterday's blog, Georgia Democratic chair Jane Kidd said she'll go slow on any frontal assault on Palin. Today, the Democrats offered state Rep. Rob Teilhet (D-Smyrna) for comment on Palin's speech (I was involved with an InDepth taping; and was unable to interview Teilhet).
Rob Teilhet is a rising star among state Democrats; but he's still working at the Georgia Capitol. None of Georgia's Democratic members of Congress--who would directly confront a McCain/Palin administration, should the Republicans win--leaped forward for a counterattack on the Alaska Governor.
They seemed to be following the lead of the man who will have to confront Palin first: the Democratic Vice Presidential nominee, Sen. Joe Biden (D-Delaware). In an aw-shucks interview on NBC's Today Show, Biden smiled and talked about what a tough job he'll have in his upcoming debate with Palin. No brass knuckles showing yet--and Biden does have them.
But, clearly, so does Palin. She opened her speech by comparing herself as a "hockey mom" to a pit bull; then went ahead and proved she has the bite. The Democrats have apparently not yet decided if her punches--and the fact she threw them first--make her fair game.
When we taped InDepth today, 11Alive political analyst Bill Crane and Atlanta Journal-Constitution editorial page editor Cynthia Tucker both said the old rules about "hitting a girl" still apply--even post-Hillary; and even when the female candidate has shown she can dish it out, and appears ready to take it.
"You can't punch a woman back," said Crane.
Tucker: "Stagecraft, and the way it appears to viewers on television, are all that matters. She is a very appealing, attractive, personable--even charismatic--figure. And it doesn't matter what she has said; Joe Biden can't be seen (as) bullying or beating up on her--or condescending."
That puts the Republicans in an enviable position. While Palin appeared to be baiting the Democrats to hit back, some high-profile male Republicans (Rudy Giuliani, for one) were blasting the media and Democrats for some of the questions they've asked about her background and record as Governor. The G.O.P. blitz was not really aimed at protecting Palin (she hardly seems to need that from the good old boys in her party). It's more of a pre-emptive strike aimed at insuring a no-lose position: if Palin goes on the attack, and Democrats don't respond in kind, she wins. If they take the bait and hit back hard, she wins.
As I mentioned in an earlier blog, I think that means we will eventually see the re-emergence of the Democrat who could trade punches with Palin, without running the risk of being seen as violating chivalry: Hillary Clinton. It's in her interest to enter the fray--and it's in her party's interest, too.
When she does, this historic election year will become even more so. The Democrats will then have to decide if anyone else will join Cinton in going after Palin. Republicans are the latest to change the game. Voters will decide if either side violated the rules. And both sides have to figure out if the rules themselves have changed. Right now, the Democrats in particular don't seem to know.
P.S. For a lot more on this fascinating two weeks, and where we all go from here, join us for the aforementioned 11Alive Weekend InDepth: Sunday morning at 11:30, on 11Alive!
The Republican National Committee just sent out some advance quotes from the speech set for delivery by vice presidential candidate Gov. Sarah Palin (R-Alaska). As predicted earlier in the day, she's focussing on the economy and her experience. Here's what the RNC released:
On her experience as a public servant:
"I had the privilege of living most of my life in a small town. I was just your average hockey mom, and signed up for the PTA because I wanted to make my kids’ public education better. When I ran for city council, I didn’t need focus groups and voter profiles because I knew those voters, and knew their families, too. Before I became governor of the great state of Alaska, I was mayor of my hometown. And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involves. I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a ‘community organizer,’ except that you have actual responsibilities."
On why she is going to Washington, D.C.:
"I’m not a member of the permanent political establishment. And I’ve learned quickly, these past few days, that if you’re not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone. But here’s a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators: I’m not going to Washington to seek their good opinion - I’m going to Washington to serve the people of this country."
On energy policies that the McCain-Palin administration will implement:
"Our opponents say, again and again, that drilling will not solve all of America’s energy problems - as if we all didn’t know that already. But the fact that drilling won’t solve every problem is no excuse to do nothing at all. Starting in January, in a McCain-Palin administration, we’re going to lay more pipelines...build more nuclear plants...create jobs with clean coal...and move forward on solar, wind, geothermal, and other alternative sources. We need American energy resources, brought to you by American ingenuity, and produced by American workers."
On John McCain:
"Here’s how I look at the choice Americans face in this election. In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers. And then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change."
Now, some quick thoughts from others on the importance of this speech. Emory political science professor Andra Gillespie said Palin faces a multi-layered task. She has to introduce herself to Americans who've started to get lots of spin from other people; she has to energize the G.O.P. base; she has to address concerns about her experience and capability; and she has to help make the case for John McCain.
"Right now, everything (about her) has been conjecture," said Prof. Gillespie. "This is her primetime moment to shine. If she doesn't, it could be disastrous for the Republican ticket."
Gillespie thinks Palin will have to walk a very fine line when it comes to addressing all of the stories about her family issues. Private concerns, like the details of the pregnancy of Palin's unwed teenage daughter, should remain private, Gillespie said.
But Gillespie, who--among other things--examines the role of gender in politics, said Palin will have to address some of the public policy questions raised by those private family experiences.
"People want to know: Is she still going to be as rabidly pro-life as she was, now that her daughter is in this situation? Is she going to be that strongly in support of abstinence-only sex education, now that her daughter has had this situation?" Gillespie said. "Pro-choice activists are not going to let it go at all; and she has to be prepared to answer that question pretty much anywhere she goes from now on."
Democrats have to walk a fine line, too, in their criticisms of Palin. If they go too far in minimizing her experience as the mayor of a small town and governor of a sparsely-populated state, they may risk a backlash. Presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama (D-Illinois) has already run into trouble this year with his remarks about rural voters.
Prof. Gillespie adds that harsh criticism of Palin's small-government experience may alienate middle American voters that the Democrats need--voters with roots similar to Palin's.
"It plays into the Democratic (stereotypical) frame of Democrats being elite, East Coast snobs: limousine liberals, latte-drinking, Volvo-driving liberals who discount anybody who didn't go to Harvard or Yale, and doesn't know which dinner fork to use," she said.
That may be one reason why Georgia Democrats still hesitate when they start to go after Palin. State Democratic chair Jane Kidd said, "I really do seriously question John McCain's judgement in appointing her."
But when I asked why, Kidd hesitated for a full seven seconds before answering. She said being governor of a small state like Alaska doesn't give Palin "the experience that I would like to see in someone--anyone, man or woman--who is a heartbeat away from the Presidency."
Kidd's initial hesitation seemed similar to the first response to Palin's selection from Obama himself. I asked her if McCain's choice had thrown the Democrats off their game.
"It's not "off our game," as much as it is the unknown," Kidd said. "She's really unknown, and seemingly unvetted, to a great extent. And I think it's the unknown that makes people unsure and concerned about her experience."
But Kidd said she herself has experiences similar to those of Palin in small city government--and similar to Obama's in a state legislature (here in Georgia). She said she's going to focus on defending Obama's experience--particularly in the U.S. Senate--rather than attacking Palin's.
Americans have vetted Obama, Kidd said. "Senator Obama has spent the last 19 months campaigning around this country, getting a majority of the votes of Democratic delegates," she said. "We don't know that much about Governor Palin."
But Kidd said her remarks about Palin won't go much beyond that.
"I'm not going to be real critical of her," she said.
That was about the only word Emory political scientist Andra Gillespie could think of, at least in the first moments after the news leaked that Alaska Governor Sarah Palin was John McCain's choice for Vice President.
When I reached her by phone, Prof. Gillespie was in Boston for a convention of political scientists. It won't be dull this weekend.
The choice was so stunning--and the candidate so little-known--that a couple of normally-verbose Georgia Democratic leaders declined to say anything for now. They want to learn more about Palin first.
One thing everyone said: Palin dramatically changes the dynamics of this campaign. Here are just a few of the ways in which she does that:
--The Hillary factor: Palin made an immediate, direct appeal to Clinton supporters. Clark-Atlanta University political scientist William Boone said that makes Clinton herself all the more vital to the Democrats. Boone predicted it won't just give Clinton more leverage, it will also put a lot more pressure on her.
"I think Hillary Clinton will probably now have the chore of making sure that her people stay at home," he said. "Hillary Clinton now will have to be a little more forceful, in terms of her endorsement of Obama."
The implication: if Clinton wants to step into the 2012 campaign should Obama lose, she knows party leaders will be watching how she responds to Palin now.
--The "experience" thing: Republicans scrambled to cast Palin as experienced, to get ahead of Democratic charges that McCain had just done the very thing he'd accused the Democrats of doing in their choice of a presidential nominee with a thin resume.
"She's already balanced two budgets," said Georgia's Republican Governor Sonny Perdue. "How many budgets has Joe Biden balanced?"
But Democrats predicted the G.O.P. has now lost its "experience" ammunition against Obama. As one Georgia Democratic leader put it, "She still has that 'new governor' smell!"
--The "change" message: In exchange for losing some of their edge on experience, Palin gives Republicans part of Obama's claim on change. Palin is not only the second woman ever named to a national party ticket (Democrat Geraldine Ferraro was the first in 1984); she's got a record of taking on the establishment within her own party. She defeated incumbent Governor Frank Murkowski in the 2006 G.O.P. primary; and blew the whistle on ethical violations by leaders in Alaska's Republican party--a state G.O.P. establishment which even Perdue admits, "has some issues."
--The Biden factor: One of the strengths of Democratic vice presidential nominee Joe Biden is his ability to go for the jugular in debates. By choosing a woman much younger than Biden as their #2, Republicans may have blunted that edge a bit; because of the still-prevailing attitudes about gender roles.
Republican Secretary of State Karen Handel, a veteran of debates with male opponents, gave a fascinating look at how that works. She said candidates of both genders face some double standards when they debate each other. A man can't attack a woman as freely as he can attack another man; a woman can't sound as harsh as a man can, for fear of coming across as the b-word (as a recent Saturday Night Live skit about Clinton pointed out).
So, my guess is Biden will have to tread more carefully with Palin than he would have if he were facing Mitt Romney, for instance. One way for him to still utilize his attacking skill is to focus on McCain.
Perdue, though, predicted Palin would surprise people. "Those expectations regarding her and Biden in a debate?" Perdue said with a smile. "My money's on Sarah."
--The gambles: Democrats have already shown they're ready to take big risks in selecting a young, relatively inexperienced African-American to run for President. He's also campaigning in ways that break a lot of the old rules, and set some new standards. Now, the Republicans are showing they're up for a high-risk-high-reward strategy, too.
In choosing a 44-year-old unknown, McCain has again appealed to independent voters. But he also runs the risk of highlighting his age (72) when he campaigns with Palin.
Also, neither vice presidential candidate brings a big state into the electoral vote column. That's a risk for each side this year; one they obviously think is outweighed by the strengths the #2 candidates bring to tickets where the men at the top have very clear strengths and weaknesses.
Professor Boone again: "I think both camps understand that they will have to take very big risks in this election, given that the election at the moment is very close."
Politics is often a game played by people who simply try not to lose, rather than swing for the fences. Not this year. Not on either side.
Should be a fascinating final three months. The selection of Sarah Palin just made it even more so.
This blog was to have been posted yesterday; but the computer locked me out. So, on the eve of John McCain's announcement of his choice for a running mate, it's probably worth a few lines on how close (or not so close) former Georgia Democratic Senator Sam Nunn came to making Barack Obama's short list.
Nunn held a conference call with reporters yesterday. When asked how far the vetting actually got, Nunn did a bit of aw-shucks, insisting it was all in the minds of the media.
"I really don't know more about it than what I read in the newspapers," Nunn said. "I was clearly mentioned by the Great Mentioners; but I'm not sure that was the Obama campaign. I'm not sure how all that works. The media would know more than I would about that.
"I was not vetted in the financial sense," Nunn continued. "There may have been some vetting going on that did not relate to my finances; but I did not get any questions.
"As I've said several times, jokingly, the only serious, intrusive questions I got about my finances were from my wife in the last several months. So I knew clearly several weeks ago that I was not in the final group. I was basically in touch with the Obama campaign primarily on matters of foreign policy and national security--and primarily with his national security team. And I think he handled all of that very well. I was not in any way misled about the vice presidential selection process; and I'm very pleased with the outcome."
That led to the natural next question about whether Nunn had been approached about a role in a potential Obama administration--either as a cabinet member or national security advisor.
"No. I've had no conversation with Senator Obama about any position in his administration," Nunn said. "It's always nice to be mentioned, and be speculated about. But I really have made no decision that I would go back into government--even if requested to. And I would have to discuss that with my family, I'd have to discuss that with the President--if Senator Obama becomes President. And I'd have to determine who the other members of the team were, and what the expectations were, and what the role was. None of that has been discussed and I don't intend to discuss it. I don't think, basically it's likely to come up in the next couple of months."
Nunn also said he's too busy to be a consistent campaign advisor to Obama. He said he has several overseas trips ahead, as he works on international agreements on nuclear materials--and on a fuel bank project.
"If I'm asked to give advice on any security or foreign policy or other matters, I will do so. But I'm not going to be a surrogate; and I'm not going to be out on the campaign trail--unless Senator Obama is in Georgia, or it's something I can do consistent with my schedule."
But Nunn said he would talk up Obama any chance he gets.
"I think he can help us change directions in foreign policy, which I believe is enormously important and overdue," Nunn said.
Monday, I had a chance to ask Republican presidential candidate John McCain why he selected Atlanta Democratic Congressman John Lewis as one of his "three wise people" during his interview with Pastor Rick Warren last weekend.
McCain smiled. "I've had the honor of knowing John Lewis, who I know is a very dedicated member of the Democratic Party," he said. "But I've admired and respected him for many years; and he's a person who I think has been through the crucible, and has emerged as a great leader of our country."
I pointed out, "This is a man, though, who would probably oppose a lot of what you would do as President."
"Mmmm, I'm not so sure," McCain replied. "But whether he did or not, I would still want to sit down and work with him. I think most Americans are fed up with Congress; and they want us to sit down and work together--Republicans and Democrats--and John Lewis has always been a person who I thought was dedicated to that."
Today, I got the chance to ask Lewis about McCain's high praise. He smiled, too.
"I was very surprised for Senator McCain to mention me," Lewis said. "I talk with him on occasion; he wrote about me in his book. A few weeks ago, he went to Selma, and walked across the (Edmund Pettus) bridge (where Lewis was beaten during the 1965 voting rights march there)."
"We're colleagues in the Congress," Lewis continued. "He never conferred or consulted me on anything."
I told Lewis that I had asked McCain about their obvious differences in party and ideology. "Could you work with (President) John McCain?" I asked.
His answer: "Well, whoever becomes President of the United States, as a member of the House, I'm going to work with that President. We have to work together and look out for the common good."
Later, I asked Lewis, tongue in cheek, if McCain's tribute would convince him to change his mind and vote for the Republican. "No!" Lewis laughed. But he was clearly flattered by it all.
The rest of the day was spent waiting......and waiting......for Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama to send that much-hyped text message announcing his choice for the Vice Presidential nomination. As the day dragged on, the inhabitants of the newsroom speculated on when the message would arrive; and we debated whether the "tease" strategy was a sound one.
I was among those who felt Obama was going to dominate the news cycle with his Springfield, Illinois event on Saturday; and he'd have the Sunday chat shows, too. So, why not just go ahead with the announcement on Friday, and command a third news cycle, too?
My colleague Keith Whitney, a very sharp political mind, pointed out that Obama had already dominated the Friday news, without revealing a thing. The question remained, however, about why he would hold off revealing a decision he said he'd already made.
We all had our ideas--most of them variations on the theory that Obama wanted to build the excitement among his core supporters to the highest possible point prior to Saturday.
Then we stepped back a bit mentally, and admitted that only hard-core political wonks and political reporters really cared that much about the timing. To most Americans, changing the wait time a day or two one way or the other is hardly the most important thing in their lives. Reality checks are important sometimes.
Of course, there may have been a reality check, too, in what one Georgia Democratic official told me today. I asked him what he thought were the reasons for the tease. He said one very simple reason might lie in the attitude one of Obama's top media folks held toward those who cover the candidate.
My source said, "He just loves to screw with you guys."
