Posted on 07/03/2009 6:40:30 PM PDT by taildragger
Like many here, I am a political prognosticator. I followed Sarah Palin here for almost 2 years and told friends last May if McCain only chance is to pick Palin. So what does Sarah Palin's latest move mean?
They both squandered it.
The bottom line is Sarah Palin brought home the conservative vote.
That accounted for about 40% of the 45.7% that McCain-Palin pulled.
But she was unable to pull in moderates and independents, who are essential to winning the White House. They went overwhelming to 0bama, and McCain’s choice of Palin was one of the main factors why in the end.
No candidate can win with conservatives alone, and that is all Palin can deliver.
I’m not saying that I know a lot of people, but the water cooler talk when Plain was picked was about 50/50. Some people jumping on board and it seemed just as many jumping off.
I don’t know, the American people cheered FDR on as the “hope and change” candidate four times. The people are certifiably slow learners.
A third party will keep us out of the WH, Senate, and the House. In 2012, Dems 50%, Repubs 30%, New Party (a generous) 20%. The New Party people feel empowered. The dems win.
Same thing happens every four years.
You are wrong.
An additional vote for McCain-Palin was an additional vote for McCain-Palin. If McCain had gotten more votes, it would have been from people who did not vote, not from people who voted for 0bama.
Elections are surveys of a candidate’s supporters.
It’s not like people first decide to vote, and THEN decide which candidate to vote for.
They vote BECAUSE they are supporters of one candidate or another.
What are you smoking man? She was on the ticket, but not the lead dog. McLame was a dog looser. (Global Warming, Amnisty, etc.) A vet, but does not have a clue. If you a not a globalist traitor, the Pubbie Elites will stab you in the back every time. Has to change. If it does not change, there will be an alternative. Both Parties suck. The Dems just suck much worse, they are traitorous Commies.
We are all sick of it, now it the time to do something besides talk.
She was competitive, McCain most of the time just smiled when obama attacked him or said something stupid or lied.
He reminded me of Chance in 'Being There.'
“Now, can we get a new conservative leader - one who eats leftists for breakfast & licks his fingers in delight? “
I’d rather have someone who who had charisma, could motivate voters and articulate his or her vision for fixing things.
Bill Bennett is an elitist who scorns hard-working Americans hurt by his pet programs like affirmative action.
In general a politician has his best chance of getting a vote from his own supporters, and his second best chance from the other guy's supporters.
Neither candidate can count on nonvoters to be motivated to vote.
Sure, there'll be some ~ but the rule is going to be the same as I stated it ~ a vote for McCain was one less vote for Obama.
I think you should thank her for getting mclaim as close as he did.
Take a good look at Sarah and then a better look at the GOP.
They are in trouble and the sooner they realize it the better we will be and they also
What other elections do you make about the vice presidential candidate?
God love you CP, but you have a very odd view of history.
McCain lost because of McCain. His candidacy made Bob Dole look like an exciting candidate. McCain’s “let’s all get along” crap and his multiple liberal-lite positions made it impossible for him to win. Even if you put Reagan or Limbaugh on as his VP, I bet he still loses against Obama.
Heck, Obama looked MORE Conservative than McCain. How is that possible?
Quit blaming Palin for McCains MANY, MANY campaign liabilities. She may not be the one in 2012, but she was NOT the problem with McCain’s crappy campaign.
Not on your life.
The conservative vote is about 85% of the Republican vote. There really aren’t very many countryclubers or RINOs when you get right down to it.
counterpunch's First Rule of Presidential Politics. So far as I can tell, no other serious observer subscribes to counterpunch's First Rule. Which is: Under certain highly specific conditions, it's never happened before. Therefore, it can never happen under any conditions.
For reasons of his own -- never identified -- counterpunch doesn't like Palin. That's his right, of course. But you may feel free to ignore his First Rule as it appears to be borne of bias...
Prediction: Rush and Sarah will go on the road together, maybe with some others, and they will lay out emperor obama's naked body for all to see. Millions will come out to see them. They will destroy cap and tax and they will destroy health care.
“But she was unable to pull in moderates and independents, who are essential to winning the White House. They went overwhelming to 0bama, and McCain’s choice of Palin was one of the main factors why in the end.
No candidate can win with conservatives alone, and that is all Palin can deliver
“
This is a great argument, but a little one sided. The Messiah would NOT have won if not for the moderates and independants.
Do you think he will get them next time around.
Yes, Sarah brings CONSERVATISM to the table, and that is all she needs. Ronald Regan did not need anything else did he?
As to your question #2: Having seen what the GOP has become, what it stands for [nothing], and who leads it, the answer is “As long as it takes”.
And I don’t think it’ll be that long. Il Douche and his assclowns will see to that.
Perhaps a metamorphosis?
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.