I hope to make this post longer in the future, and make a handy list of all of the reasons why Sarah Palin would be a fantastic choice for McCain’s Vice-President. However, until then, AllahPundit has weighed the realistic pros and cons of Palin as VP. I don’t agree with him on a few assertions; for example, I think that Hillary did more to attract the female vote by portraying herself (falsely) as the doting wife and mother with a knack for politics rather than the cold-blooded, hardened, shrieking feminist. Since 1992, it seems that Hillary has pulled out all the stops in an attempt to make herself more attractive to women of all political stripes, esepecially with her focus on womens’ and childrens’ issues. In fact, I have noticed that whenever Hillary has attempted to appeal to feminist sensibilities, it has been a net loss. Therefore, I think that Palin, who honestly portrays the image of a doting wife and mother, and is also a member of Feminists for Life, will actually not only attract some of the hardcore Hillary voters but might be able to teeter that historically-Democratic female voting bloc to McCain’s side. The Lifetime poll that AP cites is slightly disturbing, but I think that more polling needs to be done in that area (and by more objective and scientific sources than liberal, feminist TV networks.)
To answer AP’s question about Palin vs. Huckabee: out of the two, Palin is the most conservative, just as good of a public speaker (and won’t crack disturbing NRA jokes,) is just as appealing to evangelicals without being appealing to only evangelicals, and is just as appealing to working-class Dems without being panderingly populist. Palin effectively negates most of the reasons why working-class, crossover Dems would be attracted to Biden (excepting foreign policy, which I think is an utter canard in respect to Biden anyway.) Can you imagine The Sharp Alaskan vs. the Hairplugged Loose Cannon in the VP debates? Oh yeah, baby.