and she'll shore up the base (pro-life, lifetime NRA member, etc.) Perhaps she'll keep the moderate female Republicans from defecting to the other side (this was starting to happen here).

But I don't think (because of her conservative positions) she'll attract the HIllary voters. She just doesn't fit their profile, is polar opposite of Hillary on many key issues.

I'm concerned that she doesn't have foreign policy or economic experience/credentials . . . actually has a thin resume for someone who could take over the presidency.

Risky, gutsy choice.

...and frankly, I'm somewhat insulted that people would even suggest such a thing. I agree with Minnesota Mom that what matters are her positions on the issues, and in that regard this pick for VP does nothing to bring in any of the Clinton supporters who used their brain in supporting Clinton. It only makes women who already were McCain supporters happy, and there's even some danger that some of them who are very conservative, "traditional" stay-at-home mom types might actually (ironically) have trouble relating to Palin's personal choices and accomplishments, despite the appeal she'd have to them for her stance on the "values" issues.

I've spoken to at least a dozen women since yesterday. Overwhelmingly they find the Republican assumption that "a woman votes for a woman only because she's a woman" highly offensive. I think this line did more to move Hillary voters to fully commit to Obama than all of Obama's slobbering over Hill and Bill! Obama should be thanking the Republican spinmeisters!

One young woman (age 22) I spoke with said, "You can't even compare the two . . . HIllary ran a campaign and had to earn her place with the voters on a national stage. The only person who approved Palin is McCain. It's an appointed position. Outside of Alaska nobody knew her and in a general election nobody would have voted for her. You can't put her in the same class as Hillary. Not even close!" And then she went on to say that it's the only way the Republican party can get a woman to this level (the back door way).

And this speaks volumes about the the leadership of the Republican party . . . think there were any women on the nominating committee? How about putting a few Dems or independent/swing voters into those focus groups? This did more to convince women that only men run the Republican party . . . because if women were involved, or asked their opinion (ESPECIALLY on the "Hillary supporters will vote for her" spin) they would have laughed! That was my first reaction.

Yipes. The only way I can figure out this choice is by guessing that they had two criteria which had to be met in the VP candidate -- it had to be a woman AND she had to be evangelical with a compelling story. The pickings are slim if female is a requirement, and even slimmer if you add in evangelical, youthful, mother (a constant visual of pro-life, pro-family values), etc. Ironically I was angry, angry at McCain for making an irresponsible choice . . . I expect the second in command (especially given his age) to be qualified to lead the nation. And I should be happy (and at one level I am) because I'm supporting Obama, and a weak McCain choice helps him. But at the same time I think a major party should make a responsible choice . . . after all McCain could win . . . and that makes me angry . . .