Sarah Palin, current Governor of Alaska, has been selected by John McCain to run as VP on the Republican ticket.
A splendid pick, I think. :whistling
Respond immediately, all of you. :mellow:
Printable View
Sarah Palin, current Governor of Alaska, has been selected by John McCain to run as VP on the Republican ticket.
A splendid pick, I think. :whistling
Respond immediately, all of you. :mellow:
I don't know much about her other than she makes the religious right happy and she has a slim resume. Apparently that Doocy guy on F&F believes she has foreign policy experience because quote: "Alaska is next to Russia"
She will fit in well with the present administration if this thing with her ex brother in law turns out to be true.
It could not have been funnier if he had picked Michael Palin. It is all tactical to try and get the female votes. After all is said and done, they are gullible.:nono:
Does alaska have some hidden agendas?
Clearly but how could they dismiss the fact that if a relatively ancient John McCain succeeds in his election bid his inexperienced running mate is a heatbeat from power.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigboab
Even I could write the attack ads in this case.
It doesn't really matter. The leaders are only a front. Kev runs the Republican Party.:whistlingQuote:
Originally Posted by IdolEyes787Clearly but how could they dismiss the fact that if a relatively ancient John McCain succeeds in his election bid his inexperienced running mate is a heatbeat from power.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigboab
Even I could write the attack ads in this case.
So a soccer mom is going to be a heartbeat from the Presidency, heh?
Let's see...governor of the 47th most populated state (fewer citizens than Denver)- Alaska- which brings in so much oil/gas revenue that it has no state income nor sales tax.
So her experience is what, exactly?
It would appear that her choice is nothing more than a shameless attempt to cash in on disgruntled Hillary supporters, although, short of packing vadge, the two women have nothing in common.
i know nothing about her apart from that she's a governor in alaska, has a bunch of kids, and that apparently she used to take part in beauty pagents.
My initial judgement is that i agree with clocker, however, hopefully her performance over the coming weeks will show that this isn't exploitation of the feminist movement and that she just might be the best VP available to the Republicans
AT least she knows what her role will be
[youtube]b4gkPXSDtGQ[/youtube]
Perhaps one of the conservative men explained it to her :whistling
A blessing, that last.Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker
A shame, though, that 16+ years of Hillary fills your political screen to the point you literally can't see past her.
Alaska wants and deserves prosperity as much as any other state, and those who think otherwise are quite literally over-stepping.
I think Alaska's resources are best husbanded by her citizens.
Hopefully we'll be drilling in ANWR by this time next year.
BTW - I live in Michigan, and our most abundant resource (which we share with many adjoining states) is water.
Imagine how we feel when we hear that Nebraska, or Kansas, or Oklahoma, or California, ffs, needs it more than we do.
Leave the oil and natural gas in the ground?
Use a few thousand acres out of out of 19+ million?
How dare anyone presume to make that decision over the preferences of the Alaskans themselves.
BTW-
Anyone who cares to make an argument in favor of the Dems, please note that Ms. Pelosi favors shifting our dependence from fossil fuels to..........................(I still can't believe she said this)......................natural gas!
BTW-
You all sound scared shitless....
...almost as if is finally dawning on you that Obama is toast, which he most assuredly is. :whistling
You miss my point.
Mrs. Palin has less experience governing than most big city mayors and her state is not beset by the budget woes of most others.
So she has no real experience with the issues that face the COUNTRY- she'd have a snowball's chance of being elected mayor of L.A., much less a national post.
So let's see...two weeks ago McCain is telling us that Obama has no experience and he picks this rube from Alaska as his running mate?
Makes one wonder about his choices - God forbid he gets to make them- for Cabinet positions.
Barney Fife as Secretary of Defense?
We can save ANWR for another time.
Care to place a wager on that?Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
I'm not scared at all. I know in advance that my candidate will not win.
Assuming either candidate got their fiscal/tax/healthcare plans through congress, financially I would be better off under Obama. I would get a far larger tax cut under Obama and McCains healthcare plan would end up costing me more. However I don't want either of them to win and will vote my principles.
j2k4 as you have repeatedly claimed to be a conservative and not a republican and that you despise McCain, something a lot of conservatives say (then say they will hold their nose).
Will conservatives that vote republican be voting for a VP instead of president and if so why?
j2 - why do you think she is a splendid pick?
You miss my point:Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker
She has more experience than Obama, plus that fact she's second, not first, on the ticket.
She arguably has more actual and practical experience than Hillary.
As to the bet, how's about a fifty? :whistling
Google her bio, Ian.Quote:
Originally Posted by ilw
The voters want an environmentalist?
She's got more of that ability in her pinkie than the opposition with all their advisors.
On top of that, and to be totally cynical, Obama cannot be characterized as anything but a token, whose skin color is capitalized but not commented on.
If you want to call Palin a token, feel free; it won't matter.
I think the obvious reason is that she is a hard c conservative and will attract those hardliners who were disenchanted with McCain.
She has already gotten a ringing endorsement from the religious right.
I doubt if she can attract many of Hilton's disillusioned supporters though.
About experience she was mayor of a town of 9000 two years ago so you are giving her great credit as a fast learner.
Its quite a pathetic state of affairs on both our parts when anyone but old rich white men are considered 'token'.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
That said, are we reading the same bio, posing her as an environmentalist seems bizarre, her wikipedia article indicates she's perfectly happy drilling and stripping the Arctic wildlife refuge and seems generally disliked by environmental groups, plus she doesn't believe in AGW...
I think we've got a wee disconnect here. :huh:Quote:
Originally Posted by ilwIts quite a pathetic state of affairs on both our parts when anyone but old rich white men are considered 'token'.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Environmentalists don't like anything, and you know it.Quote:
Originally Posted by ilw
Drilling?
Tell me, Ian-
Why not drill?
"Stripping the Arctic wildlife refuge"?
Tell me precisely what you (or the amorphous 'they') mean by that.
One more thing:
To whatever extent natural resources are harvested in your neck of the woods, please recount each of these and justify them.
Do it now.
I see you are not answering my question.
The arguments being made by both sides about experience are basically political spin and bullshit. The double standard applies.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
Rove on Cheney
Rove on KaineQuote:
Well, look, the best candidate training is to, is — you know, this is a guy who won elections in, in a very contested primary in Wyoming, where you have to do a lot of retail campaigning, and got reelected a number of times. He’s — it’s — he’s exercising those political muscles again.
rove on PalinQuote:
With all due respect again to Governor Kaine, he’s been a governor for three years, he’s been able but undistinguished. I don’t think people could really name a big, important thing that he’s done. He was mayor of the 105th largest city in America. And again, with all due respect to Richmond, Virginia, it’s smaller than Chula Vista, California; Aurora, Colorado; Mesa or Gilbert, Arizona; north Las Vegas or Henderson, Nevada. It’s not a big town. So if he were to pick Governor Kaine, it would be an intensely political choice where he said, `You know what? I’m really not, first and foremost, concerned with, is this person capable of being president of the United States?
The democrats have identical double standardsQuote:
She’s a populist, she’s an economic and a social conservative, she’s a reformer, she took on the incumbent governor of the state Frank Murkowski — Republican — beat him in the primary, won an upset in the general election. She’s a former mayor. She’s the mayor of, I think, the second largest city in Alaska before she ran for governor.
Any use of this thinking must mean that you don't think she's ready now.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
As the position is literally one heartbeat away from being president, the VP has to be ready from the first day. Which ties into my first question.
I will first review your other post and attempt to answer your first question, "Will conservatives that vote republican be voting for a VP instead of president and if so why?"Quote:
Originally Posted by devilsadvocateI see you are not answering my question.
The arguments being made by both sides about experience are basically political spin and bullshit. The double standard applies.
Rove on Cheney
Rove on KaineQuote:
Well, look, the best candidate training is to, is — you know, this is a guy who won elections in, in a very contested primary in Wyoming, where you have to do a lot of retail campaigning, and got reelected a number of times. He’s — it’s — he’s exercising those political muscles again.
rove on PalinQuote:
With all due respect again to Governor Kaine, he’s been a governor for three years, he’s been able but undistinguished. I don’t think people could really name a big, important thing that he’s done. He was mayor of the 105th largest city in America. And again, with all due respect to Richmond, Virginia, it’s smaller than Chula Vista, California; Aurora, Colorado; Mesa or Gilbert, Arizona; north Las Vegas or Henderson, Nevada. It’s not a big town. So if he were to pick Governor Kaine, it would be an intensely political choice where he said, `You know what? I’m really not, first and foremost, concerned with, is this person capable of being president of the United States?
The democrats have identical double standardsQuote:
She’s a populist, she’s an economic and a social conservative, she’s a reformer, she took on the incumbent governor of the state Frank Murkowski — Republican — beat him in the primary, won an upset in the general election. She’s a former mayor. She’s the mayor of, I think, the second largest city in Alaska before she ran for governor.
Any use of this thinking must mean that you don't think she's ready now.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
As the position is literally one heartbeat away from being president, the VP has to be ready from the first day. Which ties into my first question.
You give me opportunity to explain my voting rationale to you.
As one who denies party affiliation, you surely must know enough about each of the parties to realize the general Republican stance more closely resembles my own than the Democrat bunch ever could, especially this go 'round.
So my options are, 1) do as you apparently will; write in a name or choose a third party candidate in order to remain true to my principles, but to no avail, or-
Take the next-best thing, which is McCain, who has chosen well for his running mate.
To fully answer your question, let me say that you seem to want to imagine a scenario wherein a Conservative contemplating a vote for Obama (:lol:) might be reclaimed as a Republican by virtue of Palin's selection.
I could see a Dem being that wishy-washy, but please be serious.
As to the rest, I'm going to take them in order, without quotes.
Be careful to match them properly.
1) Please describe this double-standard you see, and fit the players to the roles as you see them.
2) The Rove stuff - his snapshot reads on the players...what of them?
3)Ticket position - Right back atcha.
Is she ready?
Now, pay close attention, because this is exactly and precisely my position:
Whether she is or not evades the operative fact, which is that she is, at an absolute minimum, the equal of Obama, who LEADS the Democrat ticket.
BTW-
Ian, I'm waiting.
I'm not suggesting that any conservative would vote Obama because they are not happy with McCain. I've heard plenty saying they would vote 3rd party and that vote would much better reflect their principles.
The question however made no reference to conservatives thinking of voting other than republican. It was very specific about conservatives that vote republican.
So let me rephrase the question for you.
Why are disheartened republican voting conservatives that state they will hold their nose to vote McCain so excited about the VP selection? Are they voting for a VP instead of a president and if so why?
The question doesn't involve democrats and democrats shouldn't be included in the answer. it's specifically about republican voting conservatives.
The Rove stuff was just one example of the double standard in denouncing a VP pick of the other side while ignoring the same problems with their own choices. What they are critical for the other side they phrase as a plus for their own. It's bullshit.
You seem intent on saying Palin's experience is the same as Obama's. So I'm assuming as you think Palin is a good choice you don't think experience or being ready matters.
On your voting rationale, you have made great efforts to state you are a conservative and not a republican as if it's principle not party you argue from. But you admit you will vote republican no matter. So you are voting against rather than for a candidate. A rationale that will lead to the democratic/republican seesaw status quo being sustained forever. If you want me to accept that you are a conservative and not a republican you surely see how this doesn't help your case.
We get the government we deserve, your rationale IMO will always ensure we get and deserve second best.
"So excited"?Quote:
Originally Posted by devilsadvocate
Faced with the prospect of eating a worm, would you be a bit more sanguine if it were slathered with icing?
Obama being (metaphorically, anyway) a bag of worms, and Biden another one.
Yes, we most certainly do get the government we deserve, but with the election looming after (literally) a two-year campaign, a credible third-party challenge is beyond us.
This is all so basic I wonder why I even feel compelled to explain...:whistling
Also-
Given that there are two other candidates altogether, I wonder what earth-shaking event could force you to reveal which one might be yours...or name your poison, feel free. :whistling
Just two other candidates? Now granted the system we have makes it hard for a candidate to get on all the state ballots, which IMO is bad for democracy, but there are more than two 3rd party candidates.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
I'm going to explain the question:
There are party loyalists that will cheer party no matter who the candidate is such as Sean Hannity (he's just an example, don't read anything into it).
There are party loyalists that will support the party on ballot day but make it known they are not happy and not cheer in the run up.
There are non party loyalists that feel they have to vote republican because they have no other choice.
There is another group that will either stay at home, or vote 3rd party, but the question is about party loyalist that will be holding their nose.
I pose the question to you because you appear to fit into one of the above, appear to be happy with Palin as a choice. And it's best to ask someone that fits instead of someone that doesn't to get the answer.
You make great noise over the difference between Obama being the president while Palin the vice president.
It has to be considered that McCain is old and suffers life threatening or incapacitating conditions healthwise so VP becoming president has a greater odds with McCain than we would otherwise have with a president. This sounds cold and lets hope he lives a long long life, but it is a reality that has to be factored in.
So are these nose holders and party protest defectors that are now rethinking, hoping Palin will be taking over? Because unless something happens to McCain -
BTW I know resumes generally have a certain amount of embelishment but have you attempted to scratch under the surface of hers to see if she's what she's made out to be as you claim is necessary with Obama?
Her stance on the bridge to nowhere perhaps.
For the record I think for the goals of the right wing of the republican party and the religious right she is a good choice. That doesn't mean I think she's a good choice for America
Long time no see everyone. Hey J2.
Since this is where I first wet my feet in any political talk, I thought I'd stop in and see what was being said on this very topic.
My personal thoughts are that I like her.
I still, at this time, plan to vote for Ron Paul because represents what I want this country to be. McCain scares me for some reason, and Obama in my view is even worse.
So far as I can see, it is lack of experience that Obama has going for him and that's it. I don't like his plans for the country, but I do like that he is not a long time politician. Too bad he picked an oldy for his VP. Not that it would have made a difference for me, but it would have meant that he really meant change when he said it.
As far as Palin, well, she is new, but she has also been hard at work. She may not have some of the issues others have in their states, but if McCain had chosen one of the good ol boys from Alaska, would we be using location as an issue or singing their praises?
She, in her short time, has shown she is more then just words. She has actually done something. What did the ol boys do in the same position before her?
People are saying he used the sex card in picking her, but that belittles her actual accomplishments, and in my opinion makes those commentors the actual sexists.
But either way, it's still too early to say. I still plan on writing in Paul, but at least now I can consider voting for Palin (yes, I would base it on the VP) because it is no longer as scary as it was about 36 hours ago.
TD
Now I'm lost.Quote:
Originally Posted by devilsadvocateJust two other candidates? Now granted the system we have makes it hard for a candidate to get on all the state ballots, which IMO is bad for democracy, but there are more than two 3rd party candidates.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
I'm going to explain the question:
There are party loyalists that will cheer party no matter who the candidate is such as Sean Hannity (he's just an example, don't read anything into it).
There are party loyalists that will support the party on ballot day but make it known they are not happy and not cheer in the run up.
There are non party loyalists that feel they have to vote republican because they have no other choice.
There is another group that will either stay at home, or vote 3rd party, but the question is about party loyalist that will be holding their nose.
I pose the question to you because you appear to fit into one of the above, appear to be happy with Palin as a choice. And it's best to ask someone that fits instead of someone that doesn't to get the answer.
You make great noise over the difference between Obama being the president while Palin the vice president.
It has to be considered that McCain is old and suffers life threatening or incapacitating conditions healthwise so VP becoming president has a greater odds with McCain than we would otherwise have with a president. This sounds cold and lets hope he lives a long long life, but it is a reality that has to be factored in.
So are these nose holders and party protest defectors that are now rethinking, hoping Palin will be taking over? Because unless something happens to McCain -
BTW I know resumes generally have a certain amount of embelishment but have you attempted to scratch under the surface of hers to see if she's what she's made out to be as you claim is necessary with Obama?
Her stance on the bridge to nowhere perhaps.
For the record I think for the goals of the right wing of the republican party and the religious right she is a good choice. That doesn't mean I think she's a good choice for America
It seems you are trying to put a fine point on a blunt instrument.
Do I think there are some who were disenchanted with McCain as a candidate but now have summoned some enthusiasm since he's announced Palin as his running mate?
Sure.
Numbers?
Possibly substantial.
What else do you need to hear?
BTW-
What possible problem could you have with her position on the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere"?
As an aside, while you are still scurrying about avoiding a label, I have divined that, since you are so sure McCain is about to die, the prospect of Palin in the Oval Office disquiets you.
I don't sense any trepidation over the possibility of an Obama presidency, however.
Interesting, huh? :whistling
I don't like the idea of McCain, Obama or Biden there but all of them have given me reason not to fear them, domestically at least. Endure perhapsQuote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
So, you want to know why the "nose-holders", and the ones who would "never vote for McCain", are suddenly hot to vote for McCain?Quote:
Originally Posted by devilsadvocate
Okay.
The nose-holders are voting against Obama.
The never-vote-for-McCain contingent is, by default, voting for Palin, and against Obama.
You couldn't figure that out without my help?
Ffs, what does it matter to you, anyway.
BTW-
Its people who, not people that.
Now that I've enlightened you, how do you feel, and what conclusions do you reach?
I conclude that you are one of those republican people THAT is hoping that McCain wins but that he has to step aside pretty soon. Pretty sad statement about where conservatism is in the party, considering there were far more conservative candidates beaten by McCain.
Did you look into any of Palin's background yet or are you accepting the nod as is?
You may find yourself holding your nose to vote for her as well.
I have bio'd her to a fare-thee-well.Quote:
Originally Posted by devilsadvocate
I know about the deal with the state cop and his supervisor's firing.
I have no compunctions.
If McCain dropped dead immediately after the inauguration, I would be less unsettled than if Obama was in control.
In alluding to problems you see in Palin's past, you have already spent more time picking over a VP nominee than you have Obama and Tony Rezko or the Ayers character, neither of whom apparently bother you.
Try for some balance while you're being all independent and stuff, huh?
Obama has had his dirty laundry aired already It's been found he did nothing wrong with Rezko and as for Ayres just what did Obama do? He served on a committee that deals with helping the disadvantaged. Nowhere did Obama plot anything against America or have any connection with the weather underground. There is no there there, just ridiculous innuendo.
I mentioned McCain's close friendship with G Gordon Liddy in another thread. Is McCain for shooting federal agents in the head? Of course not, It's bullshit distractions to avoid talking issues.
Anyone that suggest we know nothing about Obama can't have been paying attention. We've had 18 months of in depth investigations, not just of Obama, but of his family, friends of his family, everyone he has met and those who have met people he met. We know how many times he goes to the toilet and how much the movement weighs and you complain about a couple of days of wondering who the hell this Palin woman is? Good God man.
Obama is who/what he says he is, which is why I'm not voting for him.
Palin has not been vetted and seeing as you started this thread about HER and not Obama, I am discussing her and the reaction to her nomination.
She has been introduced as a conservative reformer with impeccable ethics. So I think the cop thing needs looking into. This is something SHE may have done, not something someone she knows may have done.
In her acceptance speech she stated she told congress thanks but no thanks to the bridge to nowhere. Turns out she pushed to get federal funds restored after congress blocked them and stated she closed the project because the state representatives were unable to procure the funds, leaving them short a few hundred million. Does that sound like a fiscal conservative fighting earmarks?
When Obama proposed a windfall tax on the oil companies to pay for a fuel benefit or when the democrats proposed it to pay for alternative fuel research there was outrage from the republicans about wealth redistribution and accusations of socialism and Marxism. Palin actually did place a windfall tax on them and gave the money to Alaskan residents.
The religious right like her because she wants to ban abortion in all cases, no exceptions and she wants creationism taught in schools. She vetoed a same sex partner benefits bill as well (although apparently only because she was advised it may not be constitutional), So their issues are taken care of, apparently no further vetting is needed and no other issues matter.
We'll just have to wait and see how this all plays out.
She does have experience as Governor of Alaska, a mayor, and legislator, even as a small state, I'm sure the education obtained is relatively high, which truth be told is more than Obama can say, and he's running for the office itself. A community organizer and one-term state assemblyman, and what, 140 days in Congress before he started his campaign for president? Is he more qualified than McCain's second seater? At least she will have the luxury of learning at McCain's side in the event something happens to McCain. But he's healthy and will probably have no problems during a four-year term of office. And I think she and her husband have more real-life experience than Obama does, as well as Biden.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E29UdRc2Xw8
Palin attended Hawaii Pacific College in Hilo, Hawaii, in 1982 for a semester, where she majored in Business Administration, and transferred in 1983 to North Idaho College.In 1987, Palin received a Bachelor of Science degree in communications-journalism from the University of Idaho, where she also minored in political science. Palin briefly worked in broadcasting as a sports reporter for local Anchorage television stations and with her husband in commercial fishing.
Expound all you want about her relative experience and readiness to lead but N. Idaho College is a far cry from Havard.
And not just geographically.
I could be wrong here but I read Skizo's post as meaning the governing learning process, not academic education. I don't agree with him mind you.
At the moment she accepted the nomination all I knew about her is what she said about herself and how the campaign described her. To date apart from her proclaimed stance on social/cultural issues I haven't seen much that matches the reported reality of her record.
Aired?Quote:
Originally Posted by devilsadvocate
Bullshit.
Managed would be the word you're looking for.
You libs only yip this much when you've been jabbed stupid.
Do you seriously propose to compare the two?Quote:
Originally Posted by devilsadvocate
Liddy spouted for the CIA (to no avail) and then got caught doing a B & E.
Ayers went quite a bit further, I think you'll find.
Good God man:Quote:
Originally Posted by devilsadvocate
Pray, how much does it weigh?
You're the first I've heard claiming to actually possess that knowledge, tho' I have heard he's been more constipated lately.
You're fooling, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by devilsadvocate
So I've noticed.Quote:
Originally Posted by devilsadvocate
Whom have you been discussing it with, by the way. :whistling
It's being investigated, as we speak, by the Alaskan authorities and others.Quote:
Originally Posted by devilsadvocate
I'm sure they'd welcome your help.
Yes, in fact it does.Quote:
Originally Posted by devilsadvocate
Certain tactics work more quickly than others, truth.
You really don't understand that, do you.
The Bridge to Nowhere was a part of another bill; she was seeking to restore the "non-bridge" section, leaving the "bridge" to die of lack of funding, the state (infinitely wiser in refusing to fund it) being the only alternative, and therefore putting an end to it's consideration.
That kinda depends on what you call it.Quote:
Originally Posted by devilsadvocate
Ffs, I normally find Wikipedia incredibly wanting in most circumstances, but it will work splendidly for this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_...nd_Corporation
Funded by state oil taxes to ensure the security of future generations of Alaskans, and administered by a semi-private corporation.
What is there for one such as yourself to complain about.
This complaint always kills me.Quote:
Originally Posted by devilsadvocate
Pray tell, what does the religious left have to say.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skizo
Yes, be perfectly clear; you wish to distance yourself from that dastardly conservative baby-eating bastard.Quote:
Originally Posted by devilsadvocate
That's 'cuz you only subscribe to liberal sources. :dabs:Quote:
Originally Posted by devilsadvocate
Now, if you quote this and start with the red type again, I quit.
Come up with something original.
Objection on principle, for example. :whistling
Well, this just got a lot more interesting.
Palin announces her 17 year old daughter is pregnant.
I can only imagine the awkward position this puts Rove/Limbaugh et al. into.
Had Chelsea Clinton done this, the response from the right would have been a bloodfeast.
You've got that ass-backwards.Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker
The smart liberal press will ignore it or treat it properly.
The dumb liberal press will provide entertainment for us all.
The conservative press (WSJ, Washington Times, talk radio, all three) will be circumspect in it's coverage.
As to Chelsea, she'd have had an abortion, and no one would have ever known.
Have to give you that one. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker
And she's apparently going to wed the father.Quote:
Originally Posted by clocker
Good thinking,that will work.
Although abortion may be wrong I guess they have no problem with sham weddings,loveless marriages and the inevitable divorcing of father Jethro.
Yeah, talk radio is always circumspect.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
I'm guessing Palin will remove herself from the ticket.
Nope.Quote:
Originally Posted by clockerYeah, talk radio is always circumspect.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
I'm guessing Palin will remove herself from the ticket.
Won't happen.
She's in solid, and that just cements it.
Let's just see the lib press go toe-to-toe with Mom, the VP candidate. ;)