I’ve seen a number of “sophisticated” columnists and pundits weigh in on the election and intone gravely that Sarah Palin has become a “problem” for the McCain campaign, and was a bad choice for VP. After reading these, I not only want to call BS on them, but to question if they’re watching the same race I’m watching.
All too many seem to think there was bound to be a natural re-alignment to McCain after the convention, forgetting the fact that McCain is a candidate that the base *does not particularly like. * John McCain has probably offended just about every interest group in the Republican party. While this may make him the best choice for victory in this particular election, it’s a far stretch to say that should the GOP be guaranteed a victory he’d be the preferred choice. Sarah Palin’s selection both solidified the base and brought in the NRA endorsement, which is hard to spin as a “negative”
Sarah Palin has also brought in cold, hard cash and energy in unexpected quantities – prior to the convention, how many pundits were claiming that Obama and McCain would have rough financial parity in the race? How many would have been willing to say that the campaign could bring out 10,000+ at rallies in Virginia, Florida, and Southern California? How many plebeian votes does she bring in for each patrician “elite” that she repels?
Much has been made of her “negatives” – the fact that her like/dislike numbers have been growing worse. Well, that’s the entire point of the VP as “attack dog” – her job is to get the message out about the opposing presidential candidate and keep the base enthused with judicious servings of red meat. A VP candidate who does not increase their negatives is not doing their job. John Edwards didn’t allow the campaign to impugn his favorable/unfavorable numbers (let alone his hair) – how did that work out for him?
Overall I look at the race, and yes, this was always going to be a difficult slog for the GOP – even more so with the financial crisis popping up. The media is highly biased, and there are a dearth of energetic leaders in the GOP with the proper “credentials” to step into the VP role without issue. John McCain took a chance on Sarah Palin, and despite all of the twists and turns, he’s still hanging on as a contender. I don’t think he accomplishes that with a “problem” choice.
Steve Maley
Neil Stevens
Daniel Horowitz
I see her as a problem choice and I'll try to explain why...
deltar (Diary) Wednesday, October 15th at 4:11PM EST (link)The candidate should consolidate their base during the primary and immediately after they get enough support to be the nominee. It’s classic: Republicans run to the right in a primary, then… move to the center during the general election. Elections are won by energizing the base early, then pulling middle-of-road votes away from the other candidate. It’s a formula and a stereotype, and it usually works.
McCain had it backwards, going after centrists in the primary, then consolidating his base with Palin at the convention. The centrists don’t much like Palin, and they sure don’t care for her red-meat rhetoric. McCain needed to toss the red meat during the primary when the independants weren’t paying much attention.
2nd problem — The Republican brand should be that of the mature, thoughtful, conservative politician who values stability, strength, and experience. McCain’s choice of Palin reflects none of this. She’s definately a breath of fresh air, but she simply does not have enough experience to be a resonable Republican choice. Note, I don’t compare her to Obama – I compare her to who the Republicans should be nominating. It’s clear to the swing voter that McCain chose her for pure political reasons, as a somewhat desperate move to help him get elected in the short term.
She has helped him shore up his base, so that’s a small plus for McCain, but those folks would never vote for Obama anyway. She brings very little to help with swing voters — except for the guys voting for her because she’s pretty.