RA Editorial

The Vice-Presidential Debate
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/opinion/03fri1.html?scp=5&sq=editorials&st=cse

What are the consequences of choosing Governor Sarah Palin as running mate on Senator McCain's success in the elections.
Choosing Governor Sarah palin as running mate put a strain on Senator McCain's success in the elections.
Because, choosing Governor Sarah Palin as running mate shattered Senator McCain's image as an experienced man of principle and judgment.

The editor of this post targeted not only Senator McCain and his campaign, but also gullible, politically unsavy, conservative Americans who support him.

The editor appeals mostly to logos in his attempt to criticize Governor Palin and her Debate this past Thursday. He argues continually that she is inexperienced and knows little about the concerns she was addressing. He argued that Palin said nothing about tax cuts and global warming and that all she had to say about domestic issues was the oppinons of Soccer moms and joe sixpack. He made her sounds like a total idiot who was there only to project an image. He mentioned that most americans are beginning to doubt Palins ability. Did he take a poll? He does a swell job in making assumptions and playing on logic, but I don't think he has very many logical arguements to support his claim.

He plays on the pathos of his audience in his exagerated statements: "Except, anyone who is running for vice president in these very dangerous times needs to have detailed knowledge" and "the country’s disastrous fiscal problems" or "made a wildly irresponsible choice that shattered". These negative phrases and verbs he chose specifically to persuade his audience that voting for Palin and McCain is "appallingly bad judgment". He wants them to feel hopelessness and dispare from McCain, but hope from Obama and Senator Biden. By playing on these emotions he can swing the vote of Gulible Conservatives who trust everything their sunday newspaper reads. He strongly plays on the emotions of the people to persuade them the way he wants.

I feel that the editor of this article has a very negative attitude towards his audience. He is very demeaning and feels that he has to make Palin look like an idiot to get his point accross. I get the feeling that he feels that we are unintelligable people who can't make a decision on thier own. His tone is very negative, however, I feel it is appropriate for his audience and it works well to get his point accross.

Overall I feel he addresses his targeted audience very well. If he were trying to target a wider or different audience, I don't think his arguement would have stood as well as it did.