Commentary from Ed Rollins on Palin as VP...

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

It matters quite a bit how you rank the presidents in determining the correlation. You do realize that, right?

Duh.

[Clark Addison]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

Since when has legislative experience been the coin of the realm? She has two years of executive experience which is two more than Obama (or McCain for that matter).

Obama has marginally more experience though I don't rank Senator over Governor nor state legislator over mayor. Go ahead and give Obama the edge on this, but the point that I don't think you addressed is that it is foolish for Dems to be talking experience not because Obama doesn't have the edge over her but because this is not the subject Dems want anyone focused on. It legitimizes the idea that lots of experience is important.

If Obama wins it will be his ideas (or at least the nebulous notion of change) that carry the day, not his experience.

Its lose lose for Dems on this issue. If they didn't say anything, the McCain surrogates would be pointing out that there was silence on the issue because Dems know they are weak on it. Still, if I am the Dems I am saying it is an election of ideas and that while she is an interesting candidate her ideas are wrong for America. Take on her hard line pro-life credentials, for example.

Couple of counter-points:

1. I would also say that being a mayor is generally equal, experience-wise, to being a state legislator. I would make an exception, though, when the mayor is of a town a third the size of Payson.

2. More importantly, it doesn't matter. The fact that Palin has almost as much experience as Obama, or as much experience, or more experience, is irrelevant. What's important, IMO, is that Experience is a clear weakness for Obama, and Palin's lack of experience makes it harder for McCain to attack him on it.