[SoConPubbie]

It wasn’t her fault he lost, but the theory that she could attract enough votes to beat Barack 0bama was tested, and it failed. By nearly 10 million votes and 10 points, no less. If she was the only thing making John McCain competitive, she sure didn’t do a good job. They lost in a certified landslide.

Sorry, but your logic is fatally flawed and the exact opposite of what actually happened.

The only reason this election wasn't a Democrat version of Reagan's landslide victory over Mondale (58.8%/ 40.6%) was Sarah. She actually brought in probably an extra 10 million voters that McAmnesty would never had gotten. The excitement the base had for McCain was because of Sarah.

Evidence for this you could not have missed here on FreeRepublic where poster over poster have claimed, including myself, that the only reason they voted for McCain was Sarah.

[counterpunch]

No one ever wins a landslide victory like that unless they are already a popular sitting president up for reelection. Such victories have only been seen in the second terms of Reagan, Nixon, Johnson, and FDR.

The fact is, my friend, that McCain-Palin’s lost by larger numbers than Carter did in his landslide defeat by Reagan. That is the election you should be looking at. And if Palin took the Mondale route, then, and only then, would 0bama’s reelection look like that of Ronald Reagan’s.