There is no mention of the fact that Sarah is a Libertarian Republican in the Reagan/Goldwater mold who does not let her religious beliefs influence her governing style. It does note that her selection has energized the Republican base and attracted disaffected Hillary supporters. It also fails to deal with the fact that she is a corruption fighter against her own party and an energy expert. No mention was made of her negotiations with Canada over a natural gas pipeline or with Russia over fishing rights. The points the article hits are factually correct but what makes it poor are all the things it left out. It also fails to point out that the Vice President does not have any Constitutional duties except presiding over the Senate. Which was the point she was making with her seemingly flip remark. That shows she knows her Constitution better than the New York Times.