the REAL reason we haven't seen Palin?
By xfahctor
@xfahctor (14113)
Lancaster, New Hampshire
September 8, 2008 8:11am CST
Ok, disclaimer, this is absolutely an opinion piece on my part. Nothing more than election strategy analysis. I believe that in part, Palin is being kept out of the line of question fire until she is caught up on international media survival tactics, big "no no"s and other safeguards against inadvertantly giving them ammo.
But more, it seems to me it is a strategy to play on an important element to her addition, the "shiny-sparkly-new-thing" element. Were I running McCain's campaign, this would be drawn out as long as possible with out creating doubt and suspicion about her. Then, when I relaesed her to relieve media preassure, it would be slowly and teasingly and still a bit controlled. This whole process will be going on up until as close to the election as possible. Tell me though, does this sound like a strategy another candidate you may know has used themselves, only employed it way too early on?
1 person likes this
4 responses
@newtondak (3946)
• United States
8 Sep 08
There was a piece on this in the New York Post this morning:
http://www.nypost.com/seven/09082008/news/nationalnews/no_more_veilin_palin__sarah_to_face_medi_127989.htm
@xfahctor (14113)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
8 Sep 08
Oh, no doubt media and public pressure is building hard and they are having to make some concessions and put her out some. But the best thing they can do strategicly is drag her "shiny-thing" value out and get as much milage out of it as they can. It worked briliantly for Obama's campaign
1 person likes this
@newtondak (3946)
• United States
8 Sep 08
Obama's "shiny-thing" appeal dulled for me very quickly!
1 person likes this
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
8 Sep 08
lol Ok I know you're on my friends list but do you need my penny that bad? I'll mail you one. lmao
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
9 Sep 08
"X", I'm really thinking hard on this because I fear it's a "trick question"...lol...and one I should know the answer to.
For the moment, I give up on whom, if anyone, used this strategy before but I don't think it's a good strategy this time around regardless. It seems to me from things I've heard and people I've seen and heard talk about this, both on TV and the radio and in person that even some who were really high on Palin from the moment she was introduced and who absolutely loved her speeches are having some doubts now. For some, just tiny little doubts and for others very big ones but even the small ones are doubts just the same and, in my view, may cloud their judgment even when she does finally give an interview. Has she made a deal with, as it turns out, Charlie gibson and even ABC? Has she been getting briefed and cramming away as if for a big exam on how to answer some of the more obvious questions that SHOULD be asked? Meanwhile, her speeches, which it seems is actually only one speech which she gave part of on the day she was announced as V.P. and gave at the convention and has given on the stump several times since, have been heard over and over by many people and for some that I've spoken to after the third or fourth time they don't seem quite as refreshing and witty.
In other words, I fear the "shiny-sparkly-new-thing" element may have already burned out or is dangerously close to doing so. I could be wrong, but that's my take on it.
Annie
@xfahctor (14113)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
9 Sep 08
who? lol, well, that was just a side note, but I was refering to the strategy Obama used durring the first part of his campaign and it worked briliantly, lol. think about it, seriously. In the beginning he was this shiney-sparkly inaccessable mysterious yet intriguing thing. a sparking personality, great speaker and motivator, but kept at a distance by his campaign for a while. it built the anticipation and mystique of him. I was juust htinking today that that may well be what McCain's campaign is doing with Palin. Once they realized they had a person with that kind of dynamic public presence, they ran with it.
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
8 Sep 08
Interesting...Now will you please move your fingers back to the question you asked so I know where to go to show you some of my claim? Thank you.
@newtondak (3946)
• United States
8 Sep 08
I obviously didn't ask a question - intentionally. There have been so many discussions started here that blast the Republicans and Sarah Palin for not appearing on the various new and talk shows and wondering when she would appear - this article answers that question.
Myself, I don't feel it necessary to contradict every political discussion that crops up here. Some things can be, just what they are, and a discussion of them can proceed without there needing to be counterclaims.
1 person likes this
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
8 Sep 08
I'm confused because I wasn't typing to you, I was typing to the OP
1 person likes this
