Nope.
My argument is if 53% of Americans(who voted for 0bama) think 0bama is qualified to be president, then 53% or more can easily vote for Sarah Palin, who in reality has vastly more executive experience than 0bama ever had, to be president too.
“She had (had being the operative word) “sky high” approval rating before she ran for VP. They began to plummet shortly thereafter”
Because 0bama’s lawyer vermin started a jihad against her with fraudulent, bogus “ethics complaints” everyone of which was ultimately dismissed out of hand. Even the FBI themselves came in and declared they had never investigated Sarah Plain for ANY ethical violations EVER.
Not to mention the word was sent out by the Chicago 0bama machine, to all Democrats in Alaska, who had previously strongly backed Sarah Plain's policies, to cease all co-operation with her.
” And, you're entitled to your own opintion, but not your own facts”
You might consider taking your own advise. You are the one that claimed that Senators had to answer “answering lengthy and detailed policy questions,”, when in reality, 0bozo never had to answer any hard questions while in the Senate, and spent most of his time there campaigning.
“Ferraro had a leadership position in a caucus - something that wasn't all that common for women at the time”
Quick, tell me (without looking it up that is): Who are are the Democratic/Republican leaders in the caucus in the House TODAY?
Go to Time Square right now and ask a 100 people at random that question, and you will find out that at least 90% won't have an idea who they are.
Ferraro was known in New York because she came from here. Go to the heartland of America, and part from the hard core political junkies like those of us on FR, few people had ever heard of her.
“As such, she did attract the attention of the national media. And, she was a frequent guest on programs like Meet The Press and the like”
There are plenty of House members who have appeared on TV programs that few Americans even know or care about. Heck most Americans couldn't even give you the names of even 20 US Senators (and there are only a 100 of them) or the chairmen of the Senate Committees, let alone some caucus leader in the House
No, I said "Senators who wish to be successful and nationally known, had to answer detailed policy questions". Senators, during the course of Senate business, ask the questions, not answer them. But, if they want a national stage, then they're appearing on national news shows. The joke in Washington is "the most dangerous place in the world is the space between a Senator and a camera".
Obama was campaigning for the Presidency almost immediately since taking office. He did that by making countless media appearances and talking about contemporary political issues. No one was asking about Barack Obama, the man - in fact, the media still hasn't 'till this day.
The exact opposite is true of Palin. She has made almost no media appearances where she's fielded policy or topical issue questions. She's only spoken about herself, her family and the events leading up to and immediately after her nomination. I know more about Sarah Palin's family, than I do about my own family. It's ridiculous.
Until she demonstrates that she's an earnest and serious person, who's capable of understanding contemporary issues, and articulating solutions for those issues, you're going to have to color me unimpressed. So far, she's much more pop-culture celebrity (exactly like Obama, only appealing to another audience), than Margaret Thatcher.