Actually she seems to be helping a lot with the conservative base:
1) Fanatically pro-life
Godfearing Christian; wants creationism taught alongside evolution in science class.
Very pro-business, not at all environmentalist. (Re: Drilling in Alaska)
Seen as a reformer and sincere tax-cutter
Her being a woman is icing on the cake. I'm sure it was part of the decision, but there's no getting around the fact that in addition to her plumbing, it was Sarah Palin's stand on the issues important to the conservative base that got her picked.
So I don't think she's going to pick up that many Hillary voters (as much as I'd like to make a symbolic vote for her, the creationism thing is an absolute NO in my book), but I do think she helps his with his base, especially the evangelicals, and the folks who want to profit off the oil in the ANWR.
It's not a good time to get complacent. But then, it never has been.
It was derogatory to both of them. I won't object to you painting McCain as a serial adulterer if you won't make statements that seem to indicate Gov. Palin would meekly go along with any such activity. It really does take two to cheat.
If folks don't quit with the "X with breasts/bosom" sexist crap, I'm going to start handing out free donuts.
This is the absolute worst tack we can take toward defeating Palin. It's actively harmful to keep drawing attention to her gender. Hit her on the ISSUES, on how she is definitely more of "more of the same."
I'm seeing way too many people take it seriously. And please don't joke with sexist remarks -- it makes it look like you don't take womens' issues seriously, and we CANNOT afford to have that meme take hold with a Hillary-less ticket for the Dems.
I don't object to humor, but it would be better if you could stay away from jokes that are derogatory toward women. I'm sure we'll hear enough of that from the MSM as it is.
Very pro-life. She knew in advance that her son Trig would be born with Down's Syndrome and she chose to have him anyway. That's going to go over very well with the pro-life crowd, but they probably weren't going to vote for Obama anyway, so I don't see it as doing much, if any, damage.
Thing is, she has exactly the same amount of experience in National politics as Obama does -- and her years are as a Governor, rather than a Senator. Gubernatorial experience is usually regarded as a better prep for President than Senatorial experience.
How can we attack Palin as "not experienced enough" while still arguing that Obama is ready?
I think that narrative line is full of land mines for our side. We should focus on the issues with Palin -- her pro-life, pro-gun stances, for example. Stay away from gender politics, stay away from the experience issue -- hit her as "Still more of the same Republican crap."