Posted on 11/15/2008 8:44:17 PM PST by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
As media outlets across the fruited plain float the notion that Sarah Palin hurt John McCain's chances of winning the White House, the Washington Post's Chris Cillizza will break with the herd on Sunday to dispel this nonsense.
Imagine that.
As the last of his "5 Myths About an Election of Mythic Proportions" slated for Sunday's print edition but already available at the paper's website, Cillizza parted with his fellow journalists who believe "McCain made a huge mistake in picking Sarah Palin":
Love her or loathe her, the data appear somewhere close to conclusive that Palin did little to help -- and, in fact, did some to hurt -- McCain's attempts to reach out to independents and Democrats. But just because Palin doesn't appear to have helped McCain move to the middle doesn't mean that picking her was the wrong move.
Remember where McCain found himself this past summer. He had won the Republican nomination, but the GOP base clearly felt little buy-in into his campaign. A slew of national polls reflected that energy gap, with Democrats revved up about the election and their candidate and Republicans somewhere between tepid and glum.
Enter Palin, who was embraced with a bear hug by the party's conservative base. All of a sudden, cultural conservatives were thrilled at the chance to put "one of their own" in the White House. In fact, of the 60 percent of voters who told exit pollsters that McCain's choice of Palin was a "factor" in their final decision, the Arizona senator won 56 percent to 43 percent.
For skittish conservatives looking for more evidence that McCain understood their needs and concerns, Palin did the trick. It's hard to imagine conservatives rallying to McCain -- even to the relatively limited extent that they did -- without Palin on the ticket. And without the base, McCain's loss could have been far worse.
For those interested, Cillizza dispelled some other myths being floated by media including "The Republican Party suffered a death blow" during these elections, and "A wave of black voters and young people was the key to Obama's victory."
And in other shocking news, the sun came up in the east today and my children haven’t cleaned up their rooms.
btt
Not just the left: Rick Perry, Pawlenty, Crist, etc... they all tried to freeze her out in Florida and Perry and Pawlenty were downright rude.
That’s perfect. The MSM, against their own interests, will keep Sarah in the news for the next few years. Those who voted because of Palin will stay pumped up as she is savaged by the MSM; Obama voters who get Obama Buyer’s Remorse will have second thoughts about Sarah and “get on board” with her; intellectually honest Dems (if there are any left), moderates, and PUMAs, seeing her continue to be attacked, may get second thoughts about casting their allegiance with the Dems in 2012.
Send them a Thank You card!
Early morning no-brainer BUMP.
I think you are right, it’s my take most of us would gladly support, work for and donate to Palin.
**So, you think public tax dollars should be extorted to pay for party activities???**
Next Primary season.. we should all find the worst Dem candidate and go vote for them? They did that without our help.. and they DID that to us. OK Smarta** Where is your Actuarial Data that says there’s no actuarial Data that switching and cross party did not affect outcome.??
Since you’re an Independent... you feeling left out because my Idea wouldn’t let you Vote in Either Primary.
The DEMS and the MEDIA picked our candidates for us .. and what did we get? A Socialist and a BOLSHEVIK.
Why? Who cares what Tweedleduh or Tweedledee do?
I'm thinking that Palin got McCain at least 10 percentage points.
I'm frankly puzzled why anyone actually cares about this. The election was a set-piece October Surprise, one of the biggest ever, with the Obamedia carrying Barfsack OKenyan over the goal line with room to spare.
The question people should be asking is what did the Obamedia know about the September Surprise, and when did they know it.
The other question people should be asking loudly is "What sort of idiot would watch TeeVee or read newspapers for information?"
Only a starry-eyed naif would believe that the Obamedia didn't stage-manage the stock market implosion for the benefit of Obama, and therefore the defeat of McCain was inevitable.
That leads directly to the conclusion that any information coming out of the Obamedia AFTER the election will be managed by the new administration and its media surrogates to the point of being absolutely useless.
Now, you can hang out over at MSNBC and get "vital political information" from Keith, Ed Stein and the rest of the gang, joesbucks, but I'm not going to waste my time.
So I read an MSNBC thread and suddenly I get all my news from them?
You put forward the following theory: "Only a starry-eyed naif would believe that the Obamedia didn't stage-manage the stock market implosion for the benefit of Obama, and therefore the defeat of McCain was inevitable." Why didn't President Bush claim this or for that matter either Senator McCain or Governor Palin? Any congresscritters?
Hope your enjoyed the cartoon link. I was going to suggest checking your meds, but that wouldn't be nice. See you tomorrow.
Brent Bozell (Media Defeats McCain?): "The big question now: If the media couldn’t scrutinize the man before he was elected, why would they feel the drive to do so afterwards? They won’t. They worked for his election. They will now work for his administration. Past is prologue."
Brent Bozell: NOT a starry-eyed naif, and a guy who only reads MSNBC because it's his job... ;-)
Prove it.
"OK Smarta** Where is your Actuarial Data that says there’s no actuarial Data that switching and cross party did not affect outcome.??"
Uh, Dumba**, that's called "proving a negative", and can't be done. I've looked for data and found none. If you've got some, post it.
"Since you’re an Independent... you feeling left out because my Idea wouldn’t let you Vote in Either Primary."
Not at all. If you wanna have caucuses, or a state party convention, I've got no problem with not being able to participate. But if you're going to use state tax money to finance your election, then it had damned well better be open to all voters. BTW, I'm from Louisiana, the state with the first "jungle primary"---and I watched the effect on state politics of switching from "party only" primaries to the more open one, and the effect was completely positive. No negative effects at all.
I've since moved to Washington, and watched the effects of the opposite change (from open primary to "party only" primary) and the effects have been to bolster machine politics (just as was the case in Louisiana before switching to the "jungle primary").
YOU voted for RON PAUL, didn’t you!
Nope. Voted for McCain (actually voted for Sarah)--the McCain thing took TWO clothespins. Which is completely irrelevant to the question of closed vs. open primaries. Try sticking to the topic.
No matter how hard she tried she couldn’t overcome McDole.
Pray for W and Our Troops
Your also a LIAR ..you’re either a Paulistinian or a OBamabot.
I didn’t start this line of discussion, I just agreed with the person that started it.
If the Primaries are to be completely open ... WHY EFFING BOTHER??
Dhims go to the DHIM Primary, GOP’s Go to the GOP PRIMARY.. What of this is so hard to UNDERSTAND? that’s right, your an INDEPENDENT, so you CANT under these rules.. that’s your choice.. you chose you lost.
NOW, as you are getting tiresome.. go back to DHUMMIES Underground and get more talking points.
Now, what would be the point of making noise about it when Obama's media will just tell most of the country, including you, how to think about it? Brent Bozell knows, which is good enough for me.
I saw a good video of some Obama supporters, and Palin critics:
How Obama Got Elected... Interviews With Obama Voters
The interviewees were obviously profoundly affected by the non-stop free negative advertising campaign by the former Main Stream Media. I was wondering which one was you.
Interestingly, these people who have trouble remembering their own name, but they knew ALL about the Wicked Witch of the North.
It was amazing.
Apparently, the Zogby people, of all things, are calling the media on their free pro-Obama, hate-Palin negative to the nth degree campaign of this fall:
Zogby Poll: Almost No Obama Voters Ace Election Test
Item - 57% of these Obama voters were unable to correctly answer that Democrats controlled both the House and the Senate.
There's Something About Sarah:
Who was the candidate with the pregnant teenage daughter: Palin, 94% correct
Who was the candidate who had a $150,000 wardrobe purchased by their political party: Palin, 86% correct
Who was the candidate who didn't know how many houses they owned: McCain, 81% correct
Which candidate said they could "see Russia from their house": 87% said Palin, but actually none of the candidates said that. Tina Fey said it. Odds that 100% of the 87% saw it on Saturday Night Live - 0%
======================
"After I interviewed Obama voters on Election Day for my documentary, I had a pretty low opinion of what most of them had picked up from the media coverage of the campaign, but this poll really proves beyond any doubt the stunning level of malpractice on the part of the media in not educating the Obama portion of the voting populace," said Ziegler (the interviewing pollster).
Oh and McCain or Palin couldn't have brought up the fabricated financial meltdown during their respective debates? No media filter there. Just plain old straight forward speaking to the American People.
And of course President Bush could have used Rush or Hannity or Bill O'Reilly, or the Salem hosts, or Levin to make the same claim without filter or interpuption.
So a contrived financial meltdown seems, well shall we say a bit kooky?
And of course you must not know me well if you believe that my sources of news are the Obama media. But I think that conclusion must go along with the contrived financial melt down that obvsiouly must be fooling the leaders of the G20. One thing we do know for sure. On November 11th, you promised only one post per day. On November 16th, you gave me two. Why is truth such a hard concept to grasp?
an amused spectator: "After this, you only get one post a day, but post I will."
So I was feeling generous on November 16th. Lucky you. :-)
joesbucks: And of course you must not know me well if you believe that my sources of news are the Obama media.
joesbucks: "Oh wait, Obama ran a pretty seamless campaign."
No, the MEDIA ran a pretty seamless campaign for Obama. We're only hearing "Obama ran a pretty seamless campaign" in Obama's media organs. Or from Kathleen Parker and Peggy Noonan.
joesbucks: "Too many on the right, if hooked to a polygraph and asked the question if they really wanted a theocracy would test positive."
OK, now that's just a loony statement. I know a lot of right-wing people, and they don't want a theocracy. Now, on the other hand, the Left has already established their theocracy, and you don't seem in the least concerned or aware of it.
As for the "contrived financial meltdown" - if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then maybe it IS a duck.
I imagine you'll wait till Kathleen Parker or Peggy Noonan tell you it's OK to think it may have been contrived.
I do know that you'll never end up programming computers. Ruling out a possibility from the get-go destroys any sort of problem-solving logic.
Maybe they'll invent a computer that can be programmed with "feelings" just for you, joesbucks...
Simply do a google search and you'll find many squarely conservative folks who have stated that Obama ran a pretty solid campaign. Should keep you busy for a while reading what the pundits have to say. I'd give you some hints where to look, but that would be too easy.
Yeah, Obama got a media holiday. I know that. But it wasn't entirely the media's fault. Because the media includes Rush, Hannity, the entire Salem lineup and many others. But you see, they failed to win in the arena of ideas. Too many people didn't want to hear them. They didn't have the message that people wanted to hear. Isn't that what the free market is all about? Delivering what the people want to consume?
No one blocks their shows. No one goes around jamming radio and television sets so they can't be seen or heard. No one burns the conservative print media before it's seen or jams the internet or forums.
Oh and I bet there will be a lot of conservative campaigns that will be doing case studies on what the Obama folks did, how they did it and how it can be replicated.
Believe me, I've mentioned the polygraph to many on social right. They just get so uncomfortable with the concept. I guess maybe their afraid it might just expose. I don't see many rushing to exonerate themselves.
I would be interested in learning more about this contrived financial meltdown. Because if McCain and Palin didn't see it that way (matter of fact, Palin was chatting with Katie about the meltdown and maybe even the "D" word. So she must be drinking from the same sauce as me because she didn't see it as contrived either. Neither brought it up in the debates. Bush didn't say it was contrived. Matter of fact, he looked sick when he went on national television, unfiltered to discuss the bailout. Gee, I guess he just didn't see it as contrived.
Rule out as you desire. I've long ago decided to not pay attention to those who have no regard for being truthful.
I know can't resist and will be back again. Until then.......
No wonder you're so careless with the facts. You're not paying attention to yourself...
You simply couldn't live up to your word. Couldn't live up to your verbal commitment. Couldn't resist an additional post.
????? "verbal commitment"? Two anonymous guys on the Internet don't make "verbal commitments" to each other. Well, maybe they do on some of the "naughty" sites that you may frequent...
Well, I'll check in with the Kathleen Parker/Peggy Noonan/joesbucks fringe wing of the Free Republic again tomorrow, for more interesting theories on how The New Christian Theocracy is planning to take over the US government. While I wouldn't rule it out, because that would put me in the same "logic lockbox" that you live in, I'm doubtful.
When you look at your next 401K statement and absorb the fullness of its non-fullness, you can be comforted by the knowledge that it was just "rotten luck". No WAY anybody messed with the market. After all, it would be all over the Obama papers, wouldn't it? **snicker**
I'm feeling generous with the benighted. You're lucky again!
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.