Posted on 02/25/2012 10:18:41 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
In an in-depth exclusive interview with Big Hollywood, T. Michael Andrews, a former adviser to the McCain presidential campaign defends Governor Sarah Palin, saying that the premise of HBO’s ‘Game Change’ is dead wrong – that she was not the reason the Republicans lost the election – Obama’s fundraising is.
Andrews, a former lawyer for the Bush administration, left his position at the Department of Homeland Security in 2008 and recently authored a book, “The Border Challenge” about his experience fighting the drug war for the U.S. His interview with Big Government in January can be read here.
Andrews left Homeland in 2008 to serve as the Southwestern Regional Coordinator for the McCain/Palin Presidential_Campaign and was in charge of operations throughout Arizona, New Mexico and West Texas. Here’s what he had to say about the former Alaskan Governor and the presidential election of 2008:
The premise of the “Game Change” film is that Sarah Palin cost the Republicans the election in 2008. Do you agree?
I disagree with the premise that Palin lost the election in 2008. The fact of the matter they say that money doesn’t win elections, I say bull. Obama had more money than he knew what to do with. He was very fortunate to ride on a wave of Bush fatigue, a rejuvenated electorate with this hope and change message and more importantly, he had money, which allowed him to tap into deep resources.
Lets face it, he ran one of the best campaigns, and I’ll give him credit, from his win in the Democratic primary against Sen. Clinton to his general election win, his election will go down in history as one of the best run campaigns in political history. He caught a tsunami as far as how the electorate were feeling at the time...
(Excerpt) Read more at bighollywood.breitbart.com ...
Obama fundraising didn’t make McCain pathetic, Johnny did that all by his lonesome.
PDS, as eternal as a peat bog fire.
McCain was the problem always was
I don’t think Palin cost McCain the election but I don’t think it was Obama’s fundraising that did it to McCain either. That Obama had more money only begs the question rather than provides the answer. Obama raised more funds because he was a more appealing candidate, generated more enthusiasm and delivered a more articulate message — regardless of whether we agree with it — than McCain to the public masses at the time.
McLames distorted view on being an affable adversary was BOs greatest advantage.
If you wrote up a formula for success in making it to the White House, and then applied the idea of a fairly old candidate with average speaking talents....then you just took twenty-percent of your odds away. I suspect that you could have picked Jeb Bush for the VP position of McCains....and it wouldn’t have mattered.
BZZT wrong.
McCain LOST because he was only ever really motivated to beat the other Republicans in the primary.
McCain did not actually want to be president. He wanted to beat the other Republicans.
Once he did that, he didn’t care. McCain quit.
McCain beat his own campaign. Palin very nearly rescued it, despite McCain and his stupid staffers’ incompetence.
It’s starting to come to light (although we were hearing about it in 2008) that millions of dollars of that money came from places like Pakistan, Gaza, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Europe and the like, which is illegal. I doubt that having Ronald Reagan as his running mate would’ve saved McCain.
Fundraising isn’t nearly as almighty important as many seem to think it is. Obviously you have to be able to make ads and travel but at a certain point the money becomes meaningless.
My congressman defeated a democrat incumbent and his union minions with less than half the money in 2010. They spent $8 million and he spent around $4 million. (Which was more money than he raised in his entire 14 year career in state politics)
Obama had a 10:1 advantage over McCain because McCain didn't take public funds.
Obama said he would sit down with McCain and discuss the issue of public funds but he lied and decided to just take the money.
Obama had $750 M to McCain's $75 M. Certainly money was one of the main reasons Obama won. And that's why he'll lose this time...the GOP nominee will compete on a level field this time.
“Fundraising isn’t nearly as almighty important as many seem to think it is”
I agree with you. There’s a certain threshold necessary to be competitive but otherwise at the end of the day it’s whether a candidate resonates/connects with the voters.
I think one of the key moments was his lying to David Letterman so he could be on Katie Couric. That, for me, totally changed my thoughts on the man any level of respect.
You don’t lie, telling the electorate that you’re going to Washington to vote on a bailout package when you’re just going to the next studio for a more preferred interview.
Thanks 2ndDivisionVet.
But didn’t everyone in the nation already know who McCain was? The guy’s been around for decades, was never media shy, etc.
I think Obama won simply because of the enthusiasm he generated on the campaign trail with his well-spoken message of hope and change (even if insincerely held) and people naively liked the idea of voting for the first African American president without questioning his message.
I understand that it took a lot of money to deliver the Obama propaganda but I think the public was ripe for it, and there was little that could be done by McCain and Palin to counter it.
Obama in many ways in history will be considered the Accidental President, and the public (I hope) won’t be twice-fooled by his rhetoric into electing him in the fall for a second term.
“McCain was the problem always was”
I remember under Bush’s first term there was always quite a bit of conjecture when, not if but when, McLame was going to switch parties (along with when Jeffords and Chaffee were going to jump).
This is the guy that Republicans nominated. How could we lose? /s
And he had Romney's Reptiles sabotaging the McCain campaign from within, and Romney's Gay Brigades trashing the McCain campaign all across the nation.
McCain was down more than 30 points before Palin joined the ticket, and she brought them even and then ahead for September 2008.
Romney's Reptiles worked non-stop to elect Obama, and have continued for the past three years attacking Sarah Palin.
No, I think there were millions of younger voters, for example, who never paid attention to politics but were bedazzled by the glitzy venues Obama bought as well as the handlers he hired to go into universities, etc.
A 10:1 advantage in money is huge. What's telling is that McCain lost by only a few points even with his paltry war-chest. If he had believed in fund-raising he would have won handily.
Obama is going to lose this time because he will be struggling a lot more for $.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.