How Sarah Palin lost John McCain the Presidency
Steve Newlin, Senior Contributing Editor
I know what you’re thinking. Sarah Palin’s vice presidential nomination rallied the Republican Party’s core Religious Right. They love her. The adore her. They pack stadiums to see her. Heck, they even want her to be the president. But there’s a simple fact in US politics: No matter how powerful the Religious Right is, it can never, in and of itself, win a presidential election.
The Religious Right could not even win the Republican Party’s primary election. If the Religious Right was as powerful as most people think it is, it would be Huckabee leading his party’s ticket, not McCain. But Huckabee did not win. McCain demolished Huckabee in the primary because McCain was able to get support from people who I’ll call fiscal Republicans, those who support free market ideas but who do not politicize their moral and religious beliefs, and from moderate Democrats. Let’s face it, Huckabee could not get moderate Democratic support on the most moderate day of his life with an electrified moderating machine.
So my point has no bearing on Palin’s popularity within the Religious Right. My point is that when McCain pandered to the Religious Right and picked Palin, he alienated those moderate Democrats and fiscal Republicans who won him the primary, and his numbers dropped accordingly. Let’s face it, if Right Wingers such as Christopher Buckley are leaving McCain, you can be certain that moderate Left Wingers have already left.
This is why one Republican pundit called Palin a “fatal cancer” to the Republican Party. Cancer is alive, but it will eventually kill its host. That’s exactly what Palin did. She rallied the Religious Right to life, but then killed McCain’s campaign.
And the ironic part is that McCain and his handlers completely forgot, or completely failed to consider, that the Religious Right would have voted against Obama regardless of who ran for the Republican Party; merely because members of the Religious Right would not want a black man as president. Does anyone really think those nutjobs who call Obama an “Arab” or “terrorist” would have voted for Obama if McCain had picked a moderate running mate? There was absolutely no reason for McCain to pander to the Religious Right, as he had a lock on them from the get-go. However, by pandering he now doesn’t have a chance in heck of winning.
Why do you guys chose misleading headlines? It should read: “How THE CHOICE OF Sarah Palin lost John McCain the Presidency”
or better: “How John McCain lost the Presidency by choosing Sarah Palin.”
18 months ago, the calculation was that a republican could not get the NOMINATION without the religious nut base. McCain of 2000 sold out, sold his soul, and then forgot to flip-flop.
Even so, could ANY republican other than Bloomberg win the Presidency after the market crash==without crafting something other than the bailout?
So, if no republican could win, its totally debateable as to the exact course to crash and burn.
If McCain had not said the economy was sound, and had sent Palin out onto conservative talk radio to polish her up, he would be much closer today, but still no banana.
Yeah all the current politicians are doing such a bang up job we wouldn’t want a ‘non-experienced person’ screwing the public anywhere near Washington D.C. This article is a joke, written by an elitist fixated on the religious right like a child perv on myspace.
No, Palin’s selection was only ONE of MANY reasons McCain is trailing !!! But it was GOOD ENOUGH TO TURN OFF ***LOTS OF MODERATES*** who might have been “UNDECIDEDS”, so McCain made it EASIER FOR THEM TO SWING TOWARD OBAMA !!! John is a Big Boy and will take responsibility for his choices, unlike the VAST MAJORITY OF REPUKES, NEO-CONS, AND GOPers who ***WILL NEVER ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR OWN SCREW-UPS*** and ***ALWAYS SEEK TO BLAME SOMEONE ELSE*** !!!
“Why do you guys chose misleading headlines?”
Gee, that’s an easy one. Because it’s so fun!
Enjoy your tax increase, true believers.
Keep dreaming, Steve.
Palin’s support extends beyond the religious right. Her selection as running mate has injected a shot of enthusiasm into much (but not all) of the conservative base that was needed. Additionally, she’ll attract some moderate votes (even leftish ones).
Whether she will allow the ticket to win the election appears to be somewhat of a long shot right now, but I would rate it still within the realm of possibility.
#5 – Hannah Montana
>>Enjoy your tax increase, true believers
Oh, not to worry, Hannah. Those of us who WILL see a tax increase make enough money that we don’t care about a few percentage points for the good of the country. It’s patriotic, don’t you know?
Stumblebums like you, on the other hand, will be seeing more money in the Mad Dog 20 20 fund. I’ll bet you’re jumping with joy!
#4–SN==I see the humor, but you are mostly liberal. F&cking up on purpose is more of a republican thing.
#5–montanadude==speaking of being a F&ck UP, what percentage of blogsters here do you think make more than $250K per year. Straighten up your BS–after all, you aren’t a Dvorak Editor.
“This article is a joke, written by an elitist fixated on the religious right like a child perv on myspace.”
Oh great, a well reasoned and thought out ad hominem attack against me. When a personal attack is the worst thing someone can say about what I wrote, I guess I did a pretty good job. Thanks!
“but you are mostly liberal”
Then you don’t really know me at all.
>> Additionally, she’ll attract some moderate
>>votes (even leftish ones).
Heh heh. That will be the day. About the only positive influence on ANYTHING that she’ll have is a few extra bucks in Larry Flynt’s pocket, when he starts marketing “Nailin’ Palin”.
She’s a nutty holy rolling proselytizer, she’s ultra right-wing, she’s anti-choice, she’s a thug and a bully (and doesn’t have 1/4 the brains of Dick Cheney). Who the f&ck do you think she could POSSIBLY win over?
Well written, but I differ with one aspect of your analysis.
McCain didn’t have the RR “locked up”-they weren’t going to vote Obama without a Palin choice, they were going to stay HOME.
That’s what Rove learned in 2004-turnout, turnout, turnout.
“18 months ago, the calculation was that a republican could not get the NOMINATION without the religious nut base.”
Read what I wrote, regardless of who McCain picked as a running mate, he already had the Religious Right locked up.
#6–obo==besides your fetid imagination, please site any source at all that you have for Palin being well thought of EXCEPT by the right wingnut religious base?
Alternatively, please provide any evidence/counter argument at all==fer instance, why did Buckley jump ship?
“please site any source at all that you have for Palin being well thought of EXCEPT by the right wingnut religious base?”
Does most guys wanting to bang her hard and long constitute them thinking well of her?
#10–SN==sorry, no insult intended. Might be confusing you with other ED’s, confused by your joy of red herring headlines, or be thinking of only a few of your posts. After all, I’m not a fanboi.
#13–SN==I agree and YOU said Huckleberry had the RR sewed up at the NOMINATION stage. I said he forgot to flip flop. I agree with your analysis of the Palin effect==it made a McCain win VERY problematic if not impossible.
Both McCain and Obama made a politcal choice to fill what was considered short comings in their own candidacy. Obama has shown us there was no such short coming and Biden will actually be a help. Palin==just the opposite, she stands as a continuing reminder of McCains failure and would have been of no help at all in his admin.
A rough kind of justice.
I said ON THIS BLOG the day he picked her that McCain lost the election and by a large margin or landslide.
I love it when predict win place and show!!
“sorry, no insult intended.”
None taken, I think both sides are wrong so it’s impossible for me to support either party. 😉
In response, the fact that the Obamaties here believe Barack’s hyperbole that ONLY those making more than $250K will pay more taxes are either ‘true believers’, unreachable by truth or logic, or just plain stupid. In three debate sesions, Obama’s only response to “what will you cut” has been a longwinded oratory about anything BUT what he would cut. He then makes the vapid claim that he will “take a scalpel” to the budget. Anybody actually buying this? Do you understand that line-item vetos do not exist? WTF is he talking about??? We have a huge deficit and he’s not only NOT going to cut anything, he has visions of a huge increase in fedzilla. Anyone who studies the tax structure of the U.S. will realize that in an economic downturn, the ‘rich’ will not send more money into the treasury, even with an increase in the marginal rate; thus Obama, like Clinton, will suddenly set his sights on the middle class to make up for it. He knows this. Wake up. Or just keep chanting – ‘messiah..messiah…messiah…….’ I’m relishing the prospect of having an ‘I told you so moment’ if the Obanination wins. The middle class will see a tax increase within one year of his regime.
I think the title should be How Joe the Plumber and Sarah Palin lost John McCain the Presidency.
#19 – Hannah
>>The middle class will see a tax increase
>>within one year of his regime.
Not to worry, Hannah. You’ll probably still be eligible for that “earned income credit”, if you can stay on the job for at least 9 months.
As to the rest of your diatribe: HAW! You silly goose.
“He then makes the vapid claim that he will “take a scalpel” to the budget. Anybody actually buying this? Do you understand that line-item vetos do not exist? WTF is he talking about??? ”
You don’t know what a line item veto applies to do you? If you did you wouldn’t say such ignorant things.
#19–montanadude==oh==so like so many of your bretheren YOU mean Obama will raise taxes AFTER he is elected rather than by what he currently proposes?
I agree on your future prediction. He won’t have the sweeping new programs he wants and he may indeed be forced to raise taxes.
Just like McCain.
Failure of the next President to cut programs, real or just by reducing the standard increases, AND instituting new/higher taxes, will simply increase the deficit which history says is 95% surely what will happen.
Any creative jobs program, like going green, will take a number of years to kick in.
Only solution: legalize and tax drugs and prostitution and revoke tax status of churches and – – – – so forth.
#21
MooseTurd – Just keep chanting…magical thinking works doesn’t it?
#23
The next target will be the 401K…you know, the money you’ve set aside for retirement, believing that you will have a lower tax rate in retirement? Obama, in desperation to grow the federal government, will see that as a huge pot of money and it will only be a matter of time before you see changes in the structure and taxation of retirement accounts. Sounds ridiculous? Just wait, if he gets in: ‘you ain’t seen nuthin’ yet’.
#25–montandude==I have to give it to you. At least your fear mongering doesn’t go to religion or race.
But what a PERFECT job of projection you reveal. Your devil is taxes so you throw that boogeyman onto Obama? You are as transparent as a child and just about as thoughful.
God!!!! And there is a whole party made up of your babbling type. Did your parents not give you an allowance or what?
#26
Where’s the projection?
1) He’s clearly promising a tax increase.
2) He’s disingenous about where it will fall.
3) He’s clearly in love with the idea of ‘fairness’ which equates with income redistribution.
4) The ‘rich’ are highly successful at dodging tax increases.
thus
5) The rest of us will take it in the shorts.
Explain your statement please. Yes, my parents gave me an allowance, and I was the type who actually saved a good portion of it for that ‘rainy day’. That’s kind of what a 401K is and it is a huge pot of money in this country that is going to attract attention at some point by those who wish to expand the federal government. Paranoia is the opposite of stupidity.
#26: “Your devil is taxes so you throw that boogeyman onto Obama?”
Screw the arguing. I will bet money that under an Obama presidency everyone making more than $100k/yr will be paying higher taxes.
# 28 brm
How much are you willing to bet?
My understanding of Obama’s tax plan would be that the higher tax rate only gets applied to the first dollar after the $250K. The first $250K gets taxed at the normal rate.
So, if someone made $260K, only $10K would get taxed at the higher rate, not the $250K.
Is this right?