I don’t think McCain ever had much of a chance, but it was definitely over in the week or so after the third debate when Joe the Plumber failed to catch on as anything but a joke. It was their last volley. If he had managed to peel off some of the populist sentiment that has driven Obama’s campaign, he might have done some damage, but when it flopped they had to know it was over.
Really.
Now answer my question: name a state McCain lost because of Palin. It has to be a state you’re sure he would have won with a boring, capable white male on the ticket.
Well?
I’m not saying that Palin cost McCain the election, but it was clear in the primaries that Obama’s inexperience was a non-issue. When McCain picked Palin and many Americans felt that SHE was too inexperienced to be VICE-President despite similar credentials, it should have been clear to everyone that whatever the reason, Obama was going to win and now people were just justifying it.
McCain ran an absolutely horrible campaign. Why do people continue to insist otherwise?
I’m thinking Indiana and NC.
Nonsense. Obama’s primary credentials for his experience were his 18 months on the campaign trail, as his primary opponents argued over and over that he was a callow youth best suited for 2012 or 2028, but the voters were having none of it. Compare those 18 months to her elevation from a total nobduy to the VP slot–of course, there were severe questions about her ability to serve that had long been settled in Obama’s case. You wouldn’t have voted for him, or you didn’t? That’s fine. Millions did.
To compare Obama’s experience before reaching elected office to Palin’s betrays serious bias. Columbia vs. every fucking third-rate state school in the far west, Harvard law Review vs. nothing, really, years of teaching constitutional law vs. years on the PTA and a fishing boat, years working as a lawyer and community organizer vs. years of working (part-time, according to her defenders of her months helping Todd fish) as a mayor of a wide place in the road…
Florida. Jewish retirees were scared away by her in droves.
I think it’s a combination of factors that weight in - the one that break the horse’s back would be the economic crisis and…Joe the Plumber. Palin is bad, but endorsing Joe the Plumber? That’s even worse.
It was the moment when McCain decided to not make a hard break with Bush. Had he come out and said something like, “I have had many doubts about the way this Administration has conducted it’s affairs these past seven years. I have not spoken against them in large part as we have been at war, and I feel that it is improper to critize the sitting President at such a time. With the end of this Administration in sight, I feel it is now time for me to speak out.”. Then he should have laid out something in terms of a comprehensive strategy towards the war, the economy, and the like that was distinctly different than what Bush has done. He couldn’t do that, however, because the people he had working for him were either ones responsible for the mistakes, or they thought there was nothing wrong with what Bush had done. Once McCain decided to stay close to Bush, it was all over. Everything else was simply window dressing.
Jewish retirees are almost always transplanted Northerners who’ve been voting a straight Democratic ticket since they were 21.
I don’t doubt that elderly Jewish liberals in Florida were appalled by Sarah Palin. I DO doubt that many of them would have voted for McCain under any circumstances.
Pick two of: Indiana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, and Ohio.
364-(11+4+15+20)=314
Obama can lose all those plus Florida and still wins the election. I think Palin was a net negative, but I can’t see how McCain wins with Pawlenty or Romney or whoever on the ticket instead.
But they DIDN’T!!! As late as last weekend Palin was still using him as an example of the kind of small business OWNER she and McCain would help.
Also, the part of NW Indiana that is in the Chicago TV market is not just Gary and Hammond, but McCain appeared to write off the whole region as if it were all in Obama’s hip pocket, though he needed. If he really wanted to contest Indiana, which 538 still had pink on Monday, he should’ve tried harder in that area.
Clueless doesn’t begin to describe the McCain campaign. Self-destructive might work better.
One more vote for Blame Palin. Or more specifically, Blame McCain for picking Palin. With things already going against him, he made a choice that day to steer hard right for the base, rather than carefully up the middle for the independent/undecided votes. I think even if she had come out and proven smart and capable, it may not have mattered. This wasn’t the election to win by playing to the base. The really funny part to me is that McCain probably thought he *was *playing for the middle by picking her, the old fool. She was his little maverick soul mate. A reformer, by golly! And with a vagina to boot! What a dumbass.
Plus what has already been said about them just not working very hard. The Newsweek article paints a picture of three campaigns, two of them with heads up asses, and one really taking it seriously and making it happen.
McCain lost in so many ways, didn’t he. 
But how about the moment he got suckered into accepting Federal funding, while Obama decided not to. It let Obama out-spend and out-organize McCain, and that helped a lot.
Odd how the slate with the vast experience in running things looked like chumps compared to the supposedly inexperienced Dems. I’d put Palin in second place, and McCains incompetent response to the financial crisis in third. Not the crisis itself - if he had shown himself to be a true leader it might have helped him in the experience counts department.
This.
And, choosing a running mate who wasn’t qualified to step in and take the reins on the campaign for a few days while he went off to Washington to fix the financial crisis.
But, mostly, what ETF said: firing from the hip.
I can’t agree with your nihilipilification of Palin. She got herself elected Governor of Alaska and has been successful at fighting corruption. As for academic credentials, Reagan didn’t need to have gone to Harvard, did he?
He could have won Pennsylvania with Tom Ridge.
Except for her ethics conviction.
Reagan was one the shittiest Presidents we’ve ever had.
You might really appreciate this New Yorker article. It’s filled with history and insights, many from his “inner circle”, tracking his demise all the way back to him embracing Bush in 2004. He basically sold his soul in this campaign, and he only has himself to blame for it. By selling out on his reputation, he had no freaking clue how to wage a successful campaign because he couldn’t come up with a consistent message of who he is or what he stands for.
You must not have been paying close attention. The right wing of the Republican party set out on a mission to terrify Jews about Barack Obama with non-existent “associations” with, OMG Palestinians! and anti-Semites like Farrakhan and George Soros. They were relentless in their smear campaign. Fer cryin’ out loud, the Repigs in PA, in conjunction with McCain operatives, sent out an emailequating Obama with HITLER! And in a LOT of corners it worked like a charm. My step-mother, for one, fell for it hook, line and sinker, and no amount of debunking would sway her.