Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Shop AMAZON*
I think it's pretty obvious for unrelated reasons, too.
Well a Jindal pick would have really gotten the left to savage a minority candidate with even more conservative religious views than a female. Like chum in the water.
FDR was a losing VP.
Because he has an MD and and MBA and basically has a stratospheric I.Q.? I would go so far as to say he is smarter than Obama and Biden combined, but then realized that Obama is smarter alone, since Biden's negative I.Q. was actually bringing him down. Palin is a better natural politician, but all indications are that Jindal is a very good leader and administrator. He is also 7 years younger than Palin - assuming he serves 2 terms as Gov of Louisiana, he will still be very young when he runs for President. I'm not sure what else he could do to wait out the time - being a Senator would probably be a net negative, but even if LA has no term limits (I have no idea) it's not a good idea to stay in a jub so long that you get stale and start phoning it in.
Jindal doesn't have an MD.
Nor an MBA. Where do you get this?He has a Master's in Poli Sci, from Oxford. His undergraduate degree is in biology.
He looked very capable during his press conferences a while back, during storm season.I can't visualize him having multiple cook-athons for multiple news agencies over a few day period. Maybe this is a sign of him not having Palin's political skills, as holdfast mentioned upthread.HRC's people (admittedly this was driven by the discredited Penn) thought that she, as a woman, had an extra burden to show that she was serious enough to be CIC.And, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of folks thought Palin had more to prove because of her comments about Alaska's visual proximity to Russia, and her allegation regarding rearing heads. Palin's strong focus on homemaking duties seems to substantially differ from the HRC playbook. Maybe this is wise since the HRC playbook didn't work (and, arguably, HRC was helped by her non-iron-lady moment in NH.)
Nichevo,He doesn't have a PhD either. These are facts, not evaluations positive or negative.
Now he's, what, 37? He's got time to go back to school.
He may be smarter but he is way uglier.He is one ugly mo fo.
I suspect he's more likely to get an honorary doctorate than to earn one.
Anyone who can perform an exorcist and supports teaching creationism in school gets my vote.Still the ugly factor is hard to reconcile. That puss is just nasty.
You know is hog smells like tabouli.There is lots of cheese in that hog.
Also, if "Bobby" and Sarah go for it in 2012 you know she will beat him.Wingers don't care about intelligence.
My sense is he has a hairy cooch.
One of the more amusing media phenomena of the past week has been the launch of the new CNN Campbell Brown program, "No Bias and No Bull." She's a very attractive woman with an irritating voice who I guess they're trying to turn into the Obama era's Bill O'Reilly. ("No Spin Zone.")Anyway, Jindal was on last night, perfectly illustrating the point being made on Hot Air, making sweeping criticisms of the 2008 campaign and everything that led up to it. He didn't call out McCain by name, or Bush for that matter. He was attacking the Republican party, basically calling them hypocrites. He has absolute liberty to do this. However, from what I've seen of Sarah Palin this week, she is not letting her presence on McCain's ticket hold her back from making similar criticisms. She talks about McCain glowingly in personal terms, but doesn't say anything good about the campaign, and is openly critical of Bush who she blames pretty much directly for making 2008 an impossible year for Republicans. She's giving herself and McCain credit for "doing as well as we did." Apparently she signed on for what she knew was going to be a wipeout. Jindal's challenge strikes me as significantly greater than Palin's in terms of public scrutiny over the next four years. He's governor of a failed state. Louisiana is deeply corrupt. It is a poor state. He could be a miracle worker, and he'll still campaign with a bunch of bad metrics he'll have to explain. He could improve education dramatically, for example, and Louisiana could still be in the bottom 10. He's going to encounter all kinds of resistance from good old boys who now have an extra reason to thwart him -- to keep him off the national ticket in '12. If he can overcome all this, he'll be formidable, but I have my doubts. Palin is in a much better position, just looking at it politically, because she already has a base. Alaska's problems are nothing like Louisiana's, and she's managed to define what those problems were in terms very favorable to her. Despite all the media digging, her basic Creation story hasn't been shaken. She DID beat a corrupt GOP incumbent. She DID undo a corrupt pipeline deal. The attacks on her character only serve to reinforce her basic story, allowing her to say, "Hey, if you take on the oil industry and the good old boy network, you're going to make some enemies." In terms of the perception that she is dumb or to use the soon-to-expire cliche "uncurious," she has a lot of time to fix that. She can overturn low expectations fairly easily. Whereas Jindal is already thought to be an extremely intelligent person, which is hard to live up to all the time when you're in the spotlight. As Nixon and Carter tried to do when they were facing re-election, Obama's people will try to shape events so they get to pick who they'll run against. They are probably a lot more afraid of Jindal than Palin. They probably think it would be just grand if they could run against Palin. So there will be pretty much constant attempts to shiv Jindal, and nothing comparable against Palin. They'll let the late-night comics take care of her. (The cautionary note for Obama: Carter's people wanted to run against Reagan, who they thought the public would reject as a dumb actor with extreme views.)
"Why Jindal is smarter than Palin?"He did not trust McCain.Very smart.
I bet Gindal's wife doesn't shave her cooch and there is hair all over the place including her thighs and buttocks.I would be interested if Gindal has ever done anal with his wife.That needs to be flushed out before he runs.He is also definitley uncut.I wonder how many presidents have been cut as opposed to uncut.
Thanks to the Starr report we know Clinton was cut.
McCain had stabbed his party in back time after time aligning with Democrats. Why would he do anything different with his running mate.It was all about John McCain, all the time.
Ah, Jindal smarter than Palin?Palin before the election: "Palin who"?Palin after the election: "Dah Bomb!!"right. Jindal smarter than Palin.
Uncut hogs don't get as hard as cut hogs.
Jindal was already being widely talked about for 2012. He had a lot less to gain than Palin.
The wild card is the "generated crisis" that may, or may not, occur in the next 4 years.Biden insists that the response to the crisis will be horribly unpopular.That's where 'America's Mom' comes riding in 2012 to save the day.Generated Crisis -vs- WardrobegateIntransigent Economy -vs- The very first Female Nominee EVERPalin 2012 !!!!
He did not trust McCain. Very smart.Took the words right out of my mouth. Palin was the only thing his campaign had going for it. He waits for a week, then chooses Leno to address the smears against her? Not the actions of a loyal, honorable man. I am very disappointed in him, and I didn't think I COULD be any more disappointed in him after his sorry ass, half-hearted campaign.
Maybe the much anticipated internal R Party debate about the way forward will be a sort-of proxy war.The different factions of the R party know which likely 2012 candidates best represent their interests. So, rather than having these factions openly fight, debate, and negotiate about particular policies they'll immediately start to focus their efforts pushing for their preferred 2012 party leader.Palin seems open to playing a role.Will others join her so that different R party factions/priorities have representatives too?Will the R media and blog folks start to send hints (or stronger messages) about who they support, and who they don't?
He may be smarter but he is way uglier.Titus, since you only see the back of your guy's head, does it really matter what they look like?Inquiring minds want to know.
To use the cliche, we're comparing apples and oranges. Palin was a largely unknown governor of a population small state way the hell out of the way. No matter how good of a job she does as governor of Alaska, nobody gives a shit.Jindal is a largely unknown governor of a well known state. Yet, if he does a good job as governor of Louisiana, that will get attention. He will be able to run on the merits of his governorship. This is simply a luxury Palin doesn't have.On top of that, I suspect that Jindal has long had his eye on the top job, but is taking it slow ala Reagan. A very wise move.(On the flip side, Palin now has both campaign experience and worst of the vetting that Jindal doesn't. If Jindal goes national, the press is going to hammer him more than he ever dreamed of.)
On top of that, I suspect that Jindal has long had his eye on the top job, but is taking it slow ala Reagan. A very wise move.Reagan was a candidate for president in 1968, two years after he was elected governor. He actually won more primary votes than Richard Nixon did, though not nearly as many delegates. There was a move during the GOP convention in which Nelson Rockefeller and Reagan considered teaming up to stop Nixon. The plan was abandoned b/c Rocky couldn't commit to supporting Reagan's candidacy and vice-versa.Because of Nixon's victory, the next opportunity for Reagan to run for president wasn't til 1976. He ran then, too. Fortune favors the bold?
But before that, Reagan had a long track record of giving conservative speeches. This is one place where Jindal is failing--he hasn't been hitting the conservative speaking circuit.
If Jindal goes national, the press is going to hammer him more than he ever dreamed of.)Considering his ethnicity and being a more religious conservative than Palin, I doubt anyone can imagine the weaponry the media and leftists will bring out.I imagine Jindal watched Palin very closely and is weighing whether or not the Oval Office is worth that kind of character assasination.
To a degree never understood during his presidency, Reagan was preparing to become president for at least 20, maybe 40 years before he actually got there. Preparing not just in terms of peddling his name, but in terms of laying out an intellectual framework for what he'd do. It would be nice to think there's someone out there in either party who's giving policy and philosophy that much thought. But I don't see it. Neither candidate this year strikes me as much of a systematic thinker. To use Palin's phrase, "God opened a door" for both of them, and they didn't hesitate to jump through it. Ideas were for later. The closest comparison to Reagan who might run in '12 is probably Newt Gingrich. He's been speaking, writing books, going on TV and pushing various ideas that he obviously spends a lot of time working over, as Reagan did. But can you imagine Newt Gingrich actually running for president, with all his baggage? I think he'll try, but it'll be over in a Chris Dodd minute.
When someone asked Obama if he'd run, he explained he didn't have near enough experience.When someone asked Jindal if he was interested he said he wanted to be governor for a while.When someone asked Palin if we were going to see her as the VP pick she broke into genuine laughter.
Creds to Jindal for having the integrity to tell McCain's people that he was elected to reform Louisianan politics and that job is not done, and it would be a wrong thing to abandon Louisiana people to serve only personal political ambition.That is the sort of thing Americans respect.Interestingly, the same John Martin blog reports that Mitt Romney, in a late October interview kind of lost in the horse race, said it was "unlikely" he would run again. He said the door was open for him in 2008, he gave it his best shot, and lost to McCain.The thing about Romney is he has plenty of other interests to keep him busy and feel his talents are utilized outside politics. He ran against Teddy for Senator in 1994, alsmost beat him, then happily went back to business, charities, and church stuff for 6 years. Then the Olympics rescue, which he said renewed his interest in public service.The guy is not a political animal like a Palin, a Nixon, or Newt Gingrich or Tom DeLay, Rahm Emmanuel delighted to immerse themselves in Party matters and machinations.Romney would be happy to do some things he wanted to be President for - fix things - by other means. I imagine that fixing a Republican Party dominated by a Base that rejected him on religious bigotry and level of abortion litmus test purity and diminished him through the pandering he had to do - isn't very high on his "fix-it" list.Would you if you were him want to spend 4 years fighting the Cult of Palin for low odds the Fundies would let you get the nomination then become the underdog for the Presidency running at the head of a weak, backwards looking Ticket? Or would you like a crack at the opportunity to repair broken parts of America and have that, the Olympics, superb contribution to your church, and reinventing aspects of international business management be your legacy as well as a big, successful family?That is why if some of Obama's people are smart, they would do well to poach people like Rudy, Tom Ridge, Romney for "bipartisan" work in an Obama Administration. It kills two birds with one stone. You get competent people to help in business, gov't reform, cutting spending, national security...and you peel the moderates off a Republican rebuilding. Which will make the intolerant Base happy, followers of the Goddess Palin delighted, and further gut the Republicans.And really, what do people like Rudy, Romney, and Ridge owe the Base? All 3 busted their asses for the Republicans from 1994 to 2008 to end up treated as quasi-lepers.If Romney was offered a chance to be Obama's secretary of Commerce, or just be put to work fixing the financial system, rescuing the US Auto industry, or creating an efficient national health insurance program - why would Romney decline an offer to be Pointman, even with "constraints" Dems and Teddy insist accompany health care or certain "non-negotiables" on auto worker's rights?
Excellent points, Cedarford.With regard to Jindal, his obsessive "Social Conservative" cred is annoying and will quickly become offputting on a national stage. He needs to actually turn NO and La. around and make something of their post-Katrina wreckage before anyone should take him seriously as a candidate for higher office.For instance, if there's still plenty o' footage of the wrecked, rotting carcasses of houses, waist-deep debris and detritus, and the like coming out of NO in 4 years, Jindal had better concentrate on either running for reelection as governor to "finish the job", or think about resigning and doing something else with his time, like working for Ralph Reed, or even becoming the next Ralph Reed. If he half-asses his governorship with photo ops, nice talking about abortion, and such, he'll earn every bit of opprobrium the media will heap on him if he's got the hirsute brass danglers to go for the presidency in '12.For once in my adult life, I'd like to see the GOP field a candidate that is convincing and credible on economics and governance issues and that has the discipline to avoid circling back to safe-haven base-pleasing pie in the sky issues like outlawing abortion. Not saying he/she's gotta be pro-choice; just saying it would be nice to see the party demonstrate a shift in focus to issues that affect people more immediately.
I am versatile Hoosier. We can do it doggy style but also on the side, him on top, legs up in the air, heels to the ceiling.So you see I need to see and know there is a cute face in there at some time in the process.I have standards.
Jindal-Lingle 2012.Lingle is a popular and successful term-limited Republican governor in a blue state (Hawaii), and Jindal has enough religious conservative cred he can afford to have a pro-choice twice-divorced childless Jewish woman on his ticket to reassure moderates.
"That is why if some of Obama's people are smart, they would do well to poach people like Rudy, Tom Ridge, Romney for "bipartisan" work in an Obama Administration." Other Republicans Obama should Poach:1 - David Brooks - Press secretary2 - Bill Kristol - Immigration3 - George Will - Speech Writer4.- Graham - DOJ5.- McCain - Defense6.- Frum - Trade PolicyObama, loss of these intellectual Giants would cripple the Republican party - honest.
He needs to actually turn NO and La. around and make something of their post-Katrina wreckage before anyone should take him seriously as a candidate for higher office.Exactly. And it won't be easy. If he starts running for the presidency when he would need to, like starting next year, it would fatally distract him from what is probably the most difficult governorship in the country, for lots of reasons. Given his age, I expect he will serve two full terms as governor, work like hell to have something to show for it, leave office and THEN run for the presidency if it's open. Pawlenty and Palin have a clearer shot to the nomination because their states are relatively wealthy with less burdensome problems. They can afford to go flying off to raise money in Newport Beach or Miami. They can't lose focus, but they can take a few days off. For Obama, Clinton, McCain, Biden, Dodd and some of the others, it was much easier to campaign, since nobody really misses a senator.
Perhaps the good old boys in Louisiana will kick Bobby upstairs to run for the presidency so they can go back to looting the state coffers while he's occupied elsewhere.The Dems sent Paul Douglas to the Senate to get him out of Chicago, and Ike sent Earl Warren to the Supreme Court to keep him out of California.
Hoosier,"Titus..."Inquiring minds want to know."Uhh, no they don't! Trust me on this...
All these smart commenters and no one thought to put it this way:"Jindal blinked."
Post a Comment