Replies

I think you’re right. She was a big reason soft republicans bolted. Mac was suppose to play big in the suburbs but they thought she was a yahoo and voted against him. I thought originally her unfavorables were due to massive oversampling of democrats but from exit polling and the most accurate pollsters repeated that story.

Her rollout was not great, and I do think McCain was probably too hasty in his rollout of her.

McCain seemed to make bad decisions all around and had poor management. He had poor employees too. Tucker Bounds was awful. Rick Davis never really impressed. Only schmidt did a good job but mac undermined everything he did with poor message discipline.

But c’est la vie. You elect a RINO, the conservative base stays home and the “moderates” are notoriously unreliable and break on whatever is foremost in their mind. IN this case, it was sadly the economy.

Also Mac had no groundgame to speak of apparently. Pretty sad.

I think you’re right. She was a big reason soft republicans bolted. Mac was suppose to play big in the suburbs but they thought she was a yahoo and voted against him. I thought originally her unfavorables were due to massive oversampling of democrats but from exit polling and the most accurate pollsters repeated that story.

You're exactly right.

The lesson has been given to us for years now.

But many Ostriches believe that it's more noble to continue to make the same mistakes rather than learn from them.

She got Quayled, pure and simple. But since Mac was too weak to capitalize on anything (Fannie Freddie, Supported Bailout, Suspended Campaign, wouldn't use Ayers/Wright) he lost. Now his team, whom if we believe these reports, simply did not vet Palin, is going to frag her.

The lesson here is: lie down with RINOs, get Dems. Mac's just reaching across the aisle again. How's he supposed to face all his Senate buddies when they ask him why he lost? It was the hillbilly.

The first rule of the New Conservative Revolution is: No Sitting Senators, period. Second, closed primaries.

This is not an endorsement of Mitt.

I think you’re right. She was a big reason soft republicans bolted. Mac was suppose to play big in the suburbs but they thought she was a yahoo and voted against him. I thought originally her unfavorables were due to massive oversampling of democrats but from exit polling and the most accurate pollsters repeated that story.

Obama, Bush, and the Economy (and McCain's flub of the bailout fiasco, and the meltdown of the Dow) are the reason the moderates bolted.

Here's a clue.

Congress has an 11% approval rating.

It can be PROVEN that the mortgage mess is directly attributable to Congress.

Not only was Obama the 3rd leading recipient of lobbying money from the Fannie/Freddie folks, but you had Barney Fwank of Massachusetts sleeping with one of the execs.

McCain didn't even TRY to tie Obama to this, even though he was a Congressman.

McCain didn't even TRY to paint Obama as a clueless rookie in a dangerous world. Instead, he let the media define his campaign as clueless because his Veep pick was not internationally savvy.

Incompetence at the top should not be blamed on Palin.

Nor should the election results.

Without here, it would've been a Bush-Dukakis blowout and we would have had roars of "Mandate for Communism!"

Palin was the only thing which held for the GOP in this election -- even Norm Coleman lost to AL FRANKEN(*). That, and anti-gay-marriage initiatives.

We need to stop worrying about "electability" (so-called, according to the pundits) and worry about a consistent conservative message, including fiscal and monetary responsibility and an "America FIRST!" message instead of trying to outsource our jobs and intellectual capacity worldwide. And the elections will take care of themselves.

(*) He will, as soon as the recount is done.