Home » Blogs » Patrick Fitzgerald's blog

Palin brings energy to ticket, but lacks foreign policy cred

Fri, 08/29/2008 - 12:59pm
Michael Conti/AFP/Getty Images

A cursory search for Sarah Palin's foreign policy credentials comes up with, well, nothing. It seems that John McCain figures he's got that avenue covered, and has picked Palin to please the conservative base, add some youth to the ticket (she's 44), and reach out to female voters.

More importantly for McCain, one of Palin's strengths may be energy. She's in favor of drilling in ANWR, but has been careful to consider environmental concerns. An interview from July reveals some potential Republican talking points on energy independence:

Alaskans are frustrated because there is opposition in Congress to developing our vast amount of natural resources. We want to contribute more to the rest of the United States. We want to help secure the United States, and help us get off this reliance of foreign sources of energy."

Later, she even comments on the vice presidential speculation, and once again brings up energy:

I think that any kind of national profile, if there is any elevation of that, it's for Alaska itself. People are looking up here (and saying) we need you as leaders for energy policy. We have a willingness to develop responsibly and supply the rest of the United States, and that's why we are being looked at. I just happen to be in a position of leadership where I get drawn into that."

She can boast about standing up to big oil, having won a state tax increase on oil company profits. But, like McCain's summer gas tax holiday, she's been prone to gimmicky energy strategies, such as a botched plan to offer $100-a-month energy debit cards to Alaskans.

As governor of Alaska, she hasn't had anything to say about national security. Her oldest son will deploy to Iraq next month, which puts her in the same position as her new rival, Joe Biden. Other than that, her only statements have been vague offerings of support for Alaska's national guard. And I don't buy the argument that because Alaska borders Canada and Russia, her experience as governor should count for something there.

I think it's safe to say McCain will handle national security for the ticket. He'll use Palin's credentials on energy to hammer away at a message that served Republicans well over the summer -- more drilling.

Sure enough, McCain's official statement seems to follow this exactly.

Patrick Fitzgerald | Permalink | | Comments? Login or register
( filed under: )


Advertisement

 

FP

by Don Bacon on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 2:51pm
This makes it a sweep -- none of the four have valid FP creds. Biden and McCain, who are supposed to, have been all over the place, and have been usually wrong on Iraq, Georgia and other issues. The other two are neophytes but since experience apparently is a hindrance to good judgment then so what.

Right or Wrong not determining factor of experience

by teodoro on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 6:17pm
Sorry, if being right was a determining factor of experience, there wouldn't be anyone qualified to do anything political. Experience is measure of time and effort spent on the cause and exposure to the issues and elements at work.
By my count, Don, you've got tremendous experience at awful conclusions; so I won't discount your experience however wrong you are.

Wow!

by kidzib on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 4:00pm
What a disastrous pick! Palin + Hurricane Gustav making landfall on Monday = Democratic victory in November.

Palin's experience

by jgarzik on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 4:28pm

Certainly an interesting pick. If I'm not mistaken, Palin has more executive experience than Obama, McCain and Biden combined. She also has more "blue collar cred" than McCain, Obama or Biden. But on foreign policy, she is demonstrably a zero (not speaking to her ability, just experience, even writings on the subject).

I do agree with the general punditry that her inexperience undercuts McCain's ability to argue Obama's inexperience, previously a huge strength in McCain's favor. Inexperience is surely a key issue for Obama to hurdle in the 2008 election, and Palin may have neutralized McCain's advantage on such a major issue.

But will this hurt McCain/Palin ultimately? I think America is tired of foreign policy overall, after ~7 years of being told foreign policy matters more than domestic policy in national elections.

Maybe this marks a shift in the balance more to domestic issues, which matches how the 2008 election appears to be coalescing.

Jeff @ Armchair FP

Influence of the Media

by gabe on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 5:07pm
I think the point lost in all this is the influence of the media on McCain's pick. It's so funny that a media establishment that has over-covered Obama and under-covered McCain to the point of "Obama fatigue" ended up influencing McCain the most. We (I worked the convention for a major daily) created this story about PUMAs and the Clinton/Obama rift to build some convention hall drama for viewers. After working the hall and going through video of 20 or so Hillary supporters on days 2 and 3, I can tell you that the so-called PUMAs don't really exist, especially after Clinton's speech. But Rove's hyper-media conscious proteges working the McCain campaign took the bait and thought that there was a major rift that could be soaked up with the Palin choice. She's good for this absurd populist drilling debate, but most people liked Clinton for her politics and experience as a woman who more than held her own in the male-dominated world of DC politics, not just because she had a Y chromosome. Those who just wanted a woman regardless of issues probably weren't going to back Obama anyways. Unless energy becomes the defining issue (and given that Obama called drilling a stop-gap but didn't deny it would be part of his plan, I think he may try to diffuse it), this doesn't make much sense. But that's what you get for watching the news cycle too closely.

Re: Influence of the Media

by jgarzik on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 6:40pm

Can we be forgiven for chortling at members of the news media who think the news cycle drove the entirety of this decision? :)

I didnt say that, and please

by gabe on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 8:48pm
I didnt say that, and please don't confuse me for a self-loving pundit. I did video entirely behind the scenes, and I recognize that the media doesn't influence everything (in fact, as my post should have communicated, I very much dislike the way the news cycle works), but in this case I think it played a roll. The buzz around PUMAs caused my paper to cover that story like crazy, and as we found out, there was no story there. This combined with Roves media sensitivity leads me to believe that the media played a roll. So before you chortle, consider that I'm talking about personal experiences and analyzing the situation given a unique vantage point - not, like you, seeing the word media and making an assumption about the person behind the comment not only without reading it fully, but without knowing anything about the person. And that's why we have a pofessional media, and experienced analysts like the ones who write this blog: so the news is reported with credibility and, most of the time, without assumption.

Wear your PUMAs

by jgarzik on Fri, 08/29/2008 - 10:27pm

You said the news cycle was the largest factor in the Palin pick:

It's so funny that a media establishment [...] ended up influencing McCain the most.

According to your comment, you work at a media establishment and have been swimming in PUMA buzz.

Is it so difficult to see how you might be perceived as viewing the world through PUMA-colored glasses?


not, like you, seeing the word media and making an assumption about the person behind the comment not only without reading it fully, but without knowing anything about the person

I know only what you said... you work in media, you've been immersed in the recent news cycle, and you feel the recent news cycle caused McCain to pick Palin.

If one swims in sewage for a week, it is not unsurprising when a sewage-driven view of the world emerges. That's just a natural factor of immersion.

And besides, it was a joke, hence the smiley face. If you were truly offended, then I truly do apologize.

Not offended, as I hope you

by gabe on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 8:42am
Not offended, as I hope you weren't by mine. I was just taken aback by such a personal and, if you will, holier-than-thou response to my analysis, and responded in kind. My point is that I'd prefer reasoned arguments on why the media didn't influence the pick, not sarcastic remarks. Your last post is a good example of that, on a different subject. Regardless, Glad we can discuss this with reason and level heads. That's why I come here to post over other, more reactionary venues. Readers tend to be smart and rational.

Thanks for saying that. I

by jgarzik on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 10:12am

Thanks for saying that. I understand the point about sarcastic remarks. I will confess I did not take your post seriously because the language of the post appear to convey certainty ("the most") of the cause of the Palin pick, seemingly dismissing other factors likely to have weighted in McCain's decision process.

So, by my subjective reaction, the post did not seem to invite debate so much as state an unchallengeable opinion. I'm not saying that was your intent, just how it came across.

Anyway, to get back on topic, PUMAs surely were a factor, but I would reduce their weight in my analysis. Other factors that would weigh heavily:

  • Locking in the conservative base, particularly social conservatives. McCain still has an uphill battle to energize the GOP base, something that will be crucial if he has a hope of winning in '08.
  • Picking a reformer to emphasize change, and emphasize outside-the-Beltway-ness. Obama's narrative of change is very powerful, even if completely vague. McCain desperately needs to capture some of that, because America is in a foul mood and wants change.
  • The Great Energy Debate of 2008
  • Gender vote in general (not PUMA in particular), though this can backfire as in the case of Harriet Miers, if the pick is seen more as a token woman than skilled professional.
  • A fresh face, more media-genic than McCain himself.
  • Counter Democrat novelty of "first black president" with "first woman VP"

Jeff @ Armchair FP

And I'll acknowledge that I

by gabe on Sun, 08/31/2008 - 11:16am
And I'll acknowledge that I wasn't clear in my post. It could definitely have been interpreted as me putting this pick entirely on media influence. Anyhow, I agree that all of your bullet points played a big roll. I just think that minus the PUMA story, he would have chosen someone else who fit those criteria. I think we can all agree there are many more qualified males and females, but to get all those bullet points plus possibly attract former Hillary supporters, Palin was the pick.

WaPo on Palin pick process

by jgarzik on Sun, 08/31/2008 - 6:27pm

WaPo takes a look at the McCain VP selection process. McCain staff appear to be trying to dispel the notion that Palin was a last minute pick.

Apparently Palin was the leading contender going into last week. Aides were under pressure not to leak on the day of Barack's speech. Also, Lieberman did indeed get very serious attention.

Jeff @ Armchair FP