What exactly is a Blair house? And why wouldn't McCain last 4 years?

If you are trying to say McCain is old, wasn't Reagan like 71 or 73 when he got elected?

Its not a Blair house; it is the Blair House and is the residence of the vice president.

No, Reagan was 69 when elected;  served 1981-1989; born in Feb 1911.

Have you ever noticed how the presidents age when in office?  Not lasting is a prediction, nothing more.

So now that all that is clarified, as a Hillary supporter will you be voting for McCain/Palin?

The Presidency does age them very fast.  Check out the before and after pics of Reagan, Clinton or any of the others.

While Palin is a woman, she has some crazy right wing policies.  They won't fly with the Hillary crowd.

McCain could not have chosen a running mate that is more opposite to Hillary Clinton on just about every single issue being debated this election. The only Clinton supporters that may buy in to this, are the people that were supporting her ONLY because she was a woman and nothing more, votes Obama would have never received anyway.

The Clinton supporters that saw her as a qualified woman that is on their side of the issues and ready to be president are either unaffected, or in some cases, outraged at  the blatant pandering and borderline sexism. By choosing a clearly unqualified female candidate the republicans are try to upstage the Dems historic nomination. It is a gimmicky and desperate move. This nomination has nothing to do with helping move the country forward, and everything to do with winning an election.

Remember, the main Clinton theme in her race against Obama, was her readiness to lead. Why would a totally unqualified VP candidate running with a presidential nominee that already has one foot in the grave change any of their minds. This really speaks to a clear lack of judgment on McCain's part, and makes my really question his integrity, and this coming from a McCain supporter in 2000.

Having Palin on the Republican ticket will not draw the female supporters of Clinton.  No way!  She may be female but her stance on issues are everything that Democrats are against.  She is pro-life, she is a strong supporter of NRA and she thinks drilling for oil all over Alaska and the Alaska shoreline would just be wonderful.  She could not be more of a right-winged conservative than Rush Limba, and McCain thinks she is a "maverick"??  Just goes to show that he really is starting to get dementia in his old age.  Too bad because once he was someone that I admired for his "maverick" ways and objective thinking.

No doubt this choice will unseat the fence-sitters.  Either you like Palin or hate her.  Still, McPalin ticket is a good balance for Repubs. 

I see a solid victory for McPalin in Nov.

Obiden is going down!

The problem here is that any independent voters that were leaning toward McCain are now out the window. The far, far, far right wing views on social issues that Palin holds leaves this independent voter, and NRA member, at loss on what this campaign is thinking. In an election that moving toward the middle is essential on getting elected, McCain’s once great record of being a centrist is now destroyed.

It would be illogical for Clinton supporters to vote for the Republicans. the differences between the positions of Clinton and Obama are about the thickness of a sheet of paper. They both represent the far left wing of the Democratic party. The only difference between them was that Clinton felt that she was owed the nomination because she is a woman, and Obama felt that he was owed the nomination because he is black. As far as positions on policy, and political philosophy go, they are twins. But, having said that, one must also ask, whoever said that voters were logical?

Actually, I just may vote for McCain now. He was too liberal a Repub. for me, and I think she balances it out for the right wingers. And, I had no idea that the Democrats were supposedly the only ones allowed to have a woman or minority run...anyone who thinks that is childish, IMO. Are they gonna cry now because Repubs stole their thunder? I thought they wanted to better the country, not just try to have as historical an election as possible.

Yeah, just like Hillary drew the angry feminist lesbians who want everything handed to them on a silver platter just because they are women. Wait, maybe Palin voters and Hillary voters have more in common after all!

Wow, she sounds great. Her presence might actually draw the conservatives who thought McCain was too moderate before. And, now we can join the Democrat's fun game and tell anyone who says they are not voting for McPalin that they are prejudiced against women. I can't wait to start!

No one party ever holds the claim to making history on its own. The question is whether you attempting to make history, or just letting it happened naturally. Neither Obama nor Clinton ran on race or gender.  The selection of Palin is clear pandering from where I stand.

The question will be the ratio of votes lost from independents, Regan Democrats and the disenfranchised Clinton supporters to the votes gained from the religious right.. It may save a few normally red states from going Blue, but I am not sure it will be enough to swing the election. Only time will tell.

 It is clear that McCain is attempting to change his message again, from experience to change. It is generally hard for an incumbent party from a wildly unpopular president and perceived failed policies to run on a change message and it opens himself up for more criticism.

No, Janet Napalitano is a Democrat.

Never once did I hear the words "vote for me becuase I am black", or" vote for me becuase I am a woman" uttered from either of their mouths. Hillary never really disucssed the history of her run until after her defeat. Obama has made it a point of running not as a black American, but just an American.