That’s a really good idea!
I wouldn’t take the bet, though. She’ll show. The campaign knows it can’t hide its candidates forever.
Well, since I said it was just a 50/50 chance that she would show, why would you think I would want to bet on it?
But tdn’s bizarrely misplaced faith in your rationality raised another possible wager that I would be willing to make. I would wager that, if she does skip the debate, that whatever reason she gives will be taken up by you and defended as the greatest truth that has ever been told. I’d bet my left nut on it.
That short little piece is so fulll of typos that I have no idea whether the author really does claim that McCain is considering another “suspension” (and it was hardly a real suspension the first time):
Bolding mine.
Meanwhile, I’d be very surprised indeed if Palin didn’t take the stage Thursday, however it may turn out.
Barring any real emergency I’d have to say that the odds of her showing up are pretty much 100%. It’s only the Obama faithful who think that McCain and Palin are afraid to debate. The thing with McCain offering to put off the last debate was POLITICAL…not fear.
Try convincing some folks of that though…no possible. As for Palin, from what I understand she does fairly well in the debate structure they will be using, so I doubt she is running about in fear of debating Biden. After all, in the Obama/McCain debate neither candidate really answered the questions asked…they just essentially parroted their various talking points. I’m fairly sure Palin can parrot as well as anyone…
-XT
Here’s a vid of the interview
That’s why I didn’t give you odds. 50/50, even money.
But now that we know it was just talk…
OK, I’ll take that bet. If Palin doesn’t show up, and I defend her reason, then I will vote for Obama. If I don’t, I get your left nut.
xtisme can hold the stakes. 
Regards,
Shodan
I think she’ll show, and I think she’ll do a good enough job such that SNL writers will have to push the envelope to make this week’s show. It’s been over a month of on the road exposure to issues, a lot of prep and coaching, and three cloistered days of intense work. Debate rules don’t seem to be set up for serious discussion and follow up. Of course she could (and it’s far from a non-zero change) get stumped by something, and of course she could be left in the lurch, but I think in addition to covering the issues, a good deal of her training at the moment is in deflection (if you get cornered, say “gotach-ya journalism”.
She’s not an idiot, just dramatically underprepared for the instant onslaught of questions and details asked. I think she’ll show because she believes all of the above.
[aside]Shodan: a completely unbiased and honest question, if I may. You’ve been attacked in this thread, seemingly unprovoked. Just so I understand the various opinions that have chimed in, would you say you accept McCain/Palin’s word on things (e.g., suspending the campaign, she knew what the Bush Doctrine was, etc.) with virtually unlimited credulity? (This isn’t a trick question to point and laugh; feel free to decline to answer if you think it’s a setup.)
ETA: “Virtually unlimited credulity” sounds quite hyperbolic. I hope you don’t take it as an insult, I meant it as generally taking them at their word, with a heavy emphasis on giving the benefit of the doubt. Change as you see fit.
Runs in the family. Most of the first-borns were “early”.
I was reading it and kept thinking, “Onion articles are usually better-edited than this…”
I believe a coin will come up heads 50% of the time, but that doesn’t mean I’m willing to bet something I value on it. Shirley may feel her vote in this election is too valuable to throw away over an Internet pissing contest.
I myself prefer to only participate in Internet pissing contests when nothing is on the line but bragging rights. 
Interestikng, wouldn’t you have to suspend a first time in order to suspend “again”?
This shit is infuriating. I don’t even watch the debates because of it. I think that every time any candidate pulls that crap, the moderator should yell, “THAT WASN’T THE FUCKING QUESTION! SHUT YOUR WEASELY FUCKING MOUTH AND ANSWER THE QUESTION I ASKED!” and keep doing it, all night if necessary, until they finally give a valid answer to what they were asked.
It’s my optimism. I’d like to think that there is some point at which Republicans act so egregiously that even Shodan would stop defending it. I’m not quite sure where that point is, though.
McCain’s opening statement pretty much set me off along these same lines. I was literally tearing at my hair listening to him…and, you know, I don’t have all that much hair left to lose at this point…
-XT
…hands neutron star a cattle prod and press credentials.
I would totally watch the debates if this were how they were run.
I have never heard a single person, Obama supporter or otherwise, state that McCain didn’t want to debate because of fear. Do you have a cite for that? I certainly don’t think he was afraid.
He is clearly afraid to let Palin speak without a teleprompter or take any questions though.
Palin will take part in the “debate”. She’ll be feverishly prepped, and various talking points will come pouring out of her (“Obama is just TOO LIBERAL!”*) no matter how irrelevant they are to the questions being asked.
“So, Governor Palin, how do you propose responding to our economic crisis?”
“He’s TOO LIBERAL! Did I mention Bill Ayers? Reverend Wright!!!”
Expectations will be low, and she will meet them. Survival without horrific embarassment will be touted by the McCain camp as a huge victory.
*Hopefully, “On a clear day I can see Russia” has been retired as an example of her preparedness on foreign policy.
Wait, what was just talk? I never said anything about betting, you brought it up. Are you saying that my saying there was a 50/50 chance was just talk? Wow, brilliant insight. Saying there is a 50/50 chance of something is hardly taking a firm stand.
If she’s cute enough, sure. We don’t even have to bet.
Is my left nut always my left nut, or do they sort of roll around in there?