Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 21, 2014, 05:10:13 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  U.S. Presidential Election Results
| | |-+  2008 U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: True Federalist)
| | | |-+  How many votes did Palin cost McCain?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 Print
Author Topic: How many votes did Palin cost McCain?  (Read 13679 times)
Bo
Rochambeau
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14388
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

View Profile
« Reply #75 on: June 15, 2010, 12:49:15 pm »
Ignore

Palin helped McCain in every state that McCain won. The Obama states Palin hurt McCain. The country was very divided on her. I still think overall McCain could've lost by 10-12 points without her.

lol

You think that he'd do better or worse without her?

I think he would have done a little better. Even though Palin got a lot of conservatives energized, almost all of them would ahve still voted for McCain because they wouldn't have wanted "a librul Muslim socialist" to end up anywhere near the Oval Office. However, I think that Palin did cost McCain some support among more moderate voters due to her stupidity and rightwing views. I think that Palin cost McCain more support than she delivered, and thus I think she slightly hurt McCain's election numbers.
Logged

Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4701
United States


View Profile
« Reply #76 on: June 21, 2010, 04:08:33 pm »
Ignore

give it up. Bush cost McCain votes, not Palin.
Logged

I'm Derek and I approve this message.
Bo
Rochambeau
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14388
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

View Profile
« Reply #77 on: June 25, 2010, 01:56:58 pm »
Ignore

give it up. Bush cost McCain votes, not Palin.

Both of them cost McCain votes.
Logged

Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4701
United States


View Profile
« Reply #78 on: June 26, 2010, 03:29:01 pm »
Ignore

give it up. Bush cost McCain votes, not Palin.

Both of them cost McCain votes.

Palin cost him votes with some democrats and independents, but added to his base which was needed. Alright I guess she cost him the vote of Colin Powell.
Logged

I'm Derek and I approve this message.
Bo
Rochambeau
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14388
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

View Profile
« Reply #79 on: June 26, 2010, 04:46:00 pm »
Ignore

give it up. Bush cost McCain votes, not Palin.

Both of them cost McCain votes.

Palin cost him votes with some democrats and independents, but added to his base which was needed. Alright I guess she cost him the vote of Colin Powell.

The GOP base was going to vote for McCain anyway since they wouldn't have wanted a "baby-killing librul Muslim socialist" in the Oval Office. I agree that Palin did cost McCain a lot of votes with Democrats and independents. Many women who supported Hillary planned to support McCain, but once they saw how stupid Palin was they decided to support Obama instead since they felt that Palin made all women seem this stupid.
Logged

Senator Libertas
Libertas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14781
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.48, S: -9.22

View Profile
« Reply #80 on: June 26, 2010, 05:31:48 pm »
Ignore

give it up. Bush cost McCain votes, not Palin.

Both of them cost McCain votes.

Palin cost him votes with some democrats and independents, but added to his base which was needed. Alright I guess she cost him the vote of Colin Powell.

The GOP base was going to vote for McCain anyway since they wouldn't have wanted a "baby-killing librul Muslim socialist" in the Oval Office. I agree that Palin did cost McCain a lot of votes with Democrats and independents. Many women who supported Hillary planned to support McCain, but once they saw how stupid Palin was they decided to support Obama instead since they felt that Palin made all women seem this stupid.

No, many of them would have stayed home if McCain had chosen some "moderate" loser like Lieberman or Romney or Giuliani.
Logged
Bo
Rochambeau
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14388
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

View Profile
« Reply #81 on: June 27, 2010, 10:32:08 pm »
Ignore

give it up. Bush cost McCain votes, not Palin.

Both of them cost McCain votes.

Palin cost him votes with some democrats and independents, but added to his base which was needed. Alright I guess she cost him the vote of Colin Powell.

The GOP base was going to vote for McCain anyway since they wouldn't have wanted a "baby-killing librul Muslim socialist" in the Oval Office. I agree that Palin did cost McCain a lot of votes with Democrats and independents. Many women who supported Hillary planned to support McCain, but once they saw how stupid Palin was they decided to support Obama instead since they felt that Palin made all women seem this stupid.

No, many of them would have stayed home if McCain had chosen some "moderate" loser like Lieberman or Romney or Giuliani.

All those GOPers are either pro-abortion or were pro-abortion, though.
Logged

Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4701
United States


View Profile
« Reply #82 on: June 28, 2010, 12:13:28 am »
Ignore

give it up. Bush cost McCain votes, not Palin.

Both of them cost McCain votes.

Palin cost him votes with some democrats and independents, but added to his base which was needed. Alright I guess she cost him the vote of Colin Powell.

The GOP base was going to vote for McCain anyway since they wouldn't have wanted a "baby-killing librul Muslim socialist" in the Oval Office. I agree that Palin did cost McCain a lot of votes with Democrats and independents. Many women who supported Hillary planned to support McCain, but once they saw how stupid Palin was they decided to support Obama instead since they felt that Palin made all women seem this stupid.

No, many of them would have stayed home if McCain had chosen some "moderate" loser like Lieberman or Romney or Giuliani.

All those GOPers are either pro-abortion or were pro-abortion, though.

Exactly so more GOP voters would stay home in theory. I don't know that the GOP needs to be motivated like the democrats do though. We don't have college kids who sit around and get drunk all the time who would have to be really pushed to make it to the polls. We used to not have as many senior voters who were sometimes not able to make it for other reasons relating to health. Many people who aren't motivated and end up dependent on the government tend to support the democrats but how many of them say "oh it's raining, let someone else vote?" So voter turnout isn't as much of an issue for Republicans. Just ask Jesse Jackson who was busing people in Philadelphia in 2000.
Logged

I'm Derek and I approve this message.
Bo
Rochambeau
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14388
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

View Profile
« Reply #83 on: June 28, 2010, 02:01:18 am »
Ignore

give it up. Bush cost McCain votes, not Palin.

Both of them cost McCain votes.

Palin cost him votes with some democrats and independents, but added to his base which was needed. Alright I guess she cost him the vote of Colin Powell.

The GOP base was going to vote for McCain anyway since they wouldn't have wanted a "baby-killing librul Muslim socialist" in the Oval Office. I agree that Palin did cost McCain a lot of votes with Democrats and independents. Many women who supported Hillary planned to support McCain, but once they saw how stupid Palin was they decided to support Obama instead since they felt that Palin made all women seem this stupid.

No, many of them would have stayed home if McCain had chosen some "moderate" loser like Lieberman or Romney or Giuliani.

All those GOPers are either pro-abortion or were pro-abortion, though.

Exactly so more GOP voters would stay home in theory. I don't know that the GOP needs to be motivated like the democrats do though. We don't have college kids who sit around and get drunk all the time who would have to be really pushed to make it to the polls. We used to not have as many senior voters who were sometimes not able to make it for other reasons relating to health. Many people who aren't motivated and end up dependent on the government tend to support the democrats but how many of them say "oh it's raining, let someone else vote?" So voter turnout isn't as much of an issue for Republicans. Just ask Jesse Jackson who was busing people in Philadelphia in 2000.

If McCain would have picked a smart, competent pro-lifer, he would have still encouraged his base to vote for him in large numbers without alienating moderates and independents.
Logged

Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4701
United States


View Profile
« Reply #84 on: June 28, 2010, 06:27:27 am »
Ignore

give it up. Bush cost McCain votes, not Palin.

Both of them cost McCain votes.

Palin cost him votes with some democrats and independents, but added to his base which was needed. Alright I guess she cost him the vote of Colin Powell.

The GOP base was going to vote for McCain anyway since they wouldn't have wanted a "baby-killing librul Muslim socialist" in the Oval Office. I agree that Palin did cost McCain a lot of votes with Democrats and independents. Many women who supported Hillary planned to support McCain, but once they saw how stupid Palin was they decided to support Obama instead since they felt that Palin made all women seem this stupid.

No, many of them would have stayed home if McCain had chosen some "moderate" loser like Lieberman or Romney or Giuliani.

All those GOPers are either pro-abortion or were pro-abortion, though.

Exactly so more GOP voters would stay home in theory. I don't know that the GOP needs to be motivated like the democrats do though. We don't have college kids who sit around and get drunk all the time who would have to be really pushed to make it to the polls. We used to not have as many senior voters who were sometimes not able to make it for other reasons relating to health. Many people who aren't motivated and end up dependent on the government tend to support the democrats but how many of them say "oh it's raining, let someone else vote?" So voter turnout isn't as much of an issue for Republicans. Just ask Jesse Jackson who was busing people in Philadelphia in 2000.

If McCain would have picked a smart, competent pro-lifer, he would have still encouraged his base to vote for him in large numbers without alienating moderates and independents.

He did just that.
Logged

I'm Derek and I approve this message.
Bo
Rochambeau
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14388
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

View Profile
« Reply #85 on: June 28, 2010, 01:57:56 pm »
Ignore

give it up. Bush cost McCain votes, not Palin.

Both of them cost McCain votes.

Palin cost him votes with some democrats and independents, but added to his base which was needed. Alright I guess she cost him the vote of Colin Powell.

The GOP base was going to vote for McCain anyway since they wouldn't have wanted a "baby-killing librul Muslim socialist" in the Oval Office. I agree that Palin did cost McCain a lot of votes with Democrats and independents. Many women who supported Hillary planned to support McCain, but once they saw how stupid Palin was they decided to support Obama instead since they felt that Palin made all women seem this stupid.

No, many of them would have stayed home if McCain had chosen some "moderate" loser like Lieberman or Romney or Giuliani.

All those GOPers are either pro-abortion or were pro-abortion, though.

Exactly so more GOP voters would stay home in theory. I don't know that the GOP needs to be motivated like the democrats do though. We don't have college kids who sit around and get drunk all the time who would have to be really pushed to make it to the polls. We used to not have as many senior voters who were sometimes not able to make it for other reasons relating to health. Many people who aren't motivated and end up dependent on the government tend to support the democrats but how many of them say "oh it's raining, let someone else vote?" So voter turnout isn't as much of an issue for Republicans. Just ask Jesse Jackson who was busing people in Philadelphia in 2000.

If McCain would have picked a smart, competent pro-lifer, he would have still encouraged his base to vote for him in large numbers without alienating moderates and independents.

He did just that.

No, he didn't. Palin is very stupid and incompetent, and thus she cost McCain a lot of moderate and independent voters.
Logged

President Mitt
Giovanni
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3647
Samoa


View Profile
« Reply #86 on: June 28, 2010, 05:43:27 pm »
Ignore

149 votes.

Exactly.
Logged

[This space is available for purchase]
Carlos Danger
wormyguy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8404
Liechtenstein


View Profile
« Reply #87 on: July 18, 2010, 08:38:19 am »
Ignore

Now, the question is, who would have been a good VP pick for McCain?
Meg Whitman is probably the best.

Michael Bloomberg would also have been a great choice, since it would have proven him to be a "maverick," and, after all, who knows more about the economy than Michael Bloomberg?
Logged

Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4701
United States


View Profile
« Reply #88 on: July 18, 2010, 02:12:44 pm »
Ignore

give it up. Bush cost McCain votes, not Palin.

Both of them cost McCain votes.

Palin cost him votes with some democrats and independents, but added to his base which was needed. Alright I guess she cost him the vote of Colin Powell.

The GOP base was going to vote for McCain anyway since they wouldn't have wanted a "baby-killing librul Muslim socialist" in the Oval Office. I agree that Palin did cost McCain a lot of votes with Democrats and independents. Many women who supported Hillary planned to support McCain, but once they saw how stupid Palin was they decided to support Obama instead since they felt that Palin made all women seem this stupid.

No, many of them would have stayed home if McCain had chosen some "moderate" loser like Lieberman or Romney or Giuliani.

All those GOPers are either pro-abortion or were pro-abortion, though.

Exactly so more GOP voters would stay home in theory. I don't know that the GOP needs to be motivated like the democrats do though. We don't have college kids who sit around and get drunk all the time who would have to be really pushed to make it to the polls. We used to not have as many senior voters who were sometimes not able to make it for other reasons relating to health. Many people who aren't motivated and end up dependent on the government tend to support the democrats but how many of them say "oh it's raining, let someone else vote?" So voter turnout isn't as much of an issue for Republicans. Just ask Jesse Jackson who was busing people in Philadelphia in 2000.

If McCain would have picked a smart, competent pro-lifer, he would have still encouraged his base to vote for him in large numbers without alienating moderates and independents.

He did just that.

No, he didn't. Palin is very stupid and incompetent, and thus she cost McCain a lot of moderate and independent voters.

Keep your opinions to yourself. She's not stupid, she just doesn't talk in circles and has a great understanding of our constitution.
Logged

I'm Derek and I approve this message.
Bo
Rochambeau
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14388
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

View Profile
« Reply #89 on: July 18, 2010, 03:55:18 pm »
Ignore

give it up. Bush cost McCain votes, not Palin.

Both of them cost McCain votes.

Palin cost him votes with some democrats and independents, but added to his base which was needed. Alright I guess she cost him the vote of Colin Powell.

The GOP base was going to vote for McCain anyway since they wouldn't have wanted a "baby-killing librul Muslim socialist" in the Oval Office. I agree that Palin did cost McCain a lot of votes with Democrats and independents. Many women who supported Hillary planned to support McCain, but once they saw how stupid Palin was they decided to support Obama instead since they felt that Palin made all women seem this stupid.

No, many of them would have stayed home if McCain had chosen some "moderate" loser like Lieberman or Romney or Giuliani.

All those GOPers are either pro-abortion or were pro-abortion, though.

Exactly so more GOP voters would stay home in theory. I don't know that the GOP needs to be motivated like the democrats do though. We don't have college kids who sit around and get drunk all the time who would have to be really pushed to make it to the polls. We used to not have as many senior voters who were sometimes not able to make it for other reasons relating to health. Many people who aren't motivated and end up dependent on the government tend to support the democrats but how many of them say "oh it's raining, let someone else vote?" So voter turnout isn't as much of an issue for Republicans. Just ask Jesse Jackson who was busing people in Philadelphia in 2000.

If McCain would have picked a smart, competent pro-lifer, he would have still encouraged his base to vote for him in large numbers without alienating moderates and independents.

He did just that.

No, he didn't. Palin is very stupid and incompetent, and thus she cost McCain a lot of moderate and independent voters.

Keep your opinions to yourself. She's not stupid, she just doesn't talk in circles and has a great understanding of our constitution.

This is a political forum. Why would I keep my opinions to myself? And frankly, no offense, but my opinions are less biased than yours. And I bet Palin doesn't even know who was the Father of the U.S. Constitution. I mean, she doesn't read newspapers.
Logged

hcallega
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1563
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.10, S: -3.90

View Profile
« Reply #90 on: July 18, 2010, 08:49:26 pm »
Ignore

I agree to a certain extent with Derek in that she probably didn't swing any conservatives or hard GOPers to Obama. However she likely alienated many Independents and moderate suburban Democrats. As far as her intelligence, well I think that the verdict is in and it's pretty hard to argue who is smarter, Palin (Univesity of Idaho, 1987) or Obama (Occidental College, Columbia University and then Harvard, Palin doesn't even have a masters!).

As far as who would be better? On paper Huckabee, though he didn't get along with McCain. I would also say Newt Gingrich, John Thune, or John Hoeven. Anyone with a strong pro-life record and no major negatives. That would eliminate Romney (Mormon), Graham (immigration reform), Ridge & Lieberman (abortion), or Mel Martinez (Hispanic).
Logged


"There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right with America."-President William Jefferson Clinton
"There is not a liberal America and a conservative America there is the United States of America."-Senator Barack Obama
Progressive
jro660
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1114


View Profile
« Reply #91 on: August 05, 2010, 10:43:46 am »
Ignore

http://

STRONGLY DISAGREE!!!!!!!!!

Palin helped McCain and without her he would've lost about 54-45 and lost in a couple other conservative states. She helped to get out the GOP base who never liked McCain to begin with.  Bush is the one who cost McCain votes.

I actually agree with Derek. Palin turned out her "mama grizzlies" and actually gave McCain a fighting chance in socially conservative states. If McCain had chosen Ridge, Lieberman, Pawlenty, Romney, it could've been an extremely boring ticket and would've lost even more.
Logged
Badger
badger
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10563
United States


View Profile
« Reply #92 on: August 06, 2010, 11:59:38 am »
Ignore

http://

STRONGLY DISAGREE!!!!!!!!!

Palin helped McCain and without her he would've lost about 54-45 and lost in a couple other conservative states. She helped to get out the GOP base who never liked McCain to begin with.  Bush is the one who cost McCain votes.

I actually agree with Derek. Palin turned out her "mama grizzlies" and actually gave McCain a fighting chance in socially conservative states. If McCain had chosen Ridge, Lieberman, Pawlenty, Romney, it could've been an extremely boring ticket and would've lost even more.

Meh. Does anyone really think Obama wasn't sufficiently demonized by the right--and would have been just as much without Palin--that the base wouldn't have turned out about the same with another generic pro-life conservative on the ticket? The only advantages Palin brought were a temporary burst of enthusiastic volunteers in the week after her selection (who admittedly probably didn't stop showing up even when the wheels fell off her campaign), and switched Alaska's 3 electoral votes from North Dakota-like semi-competative status to safe Republican. The damage she did by alienating moderate Republicans and making swing voters afraid of her being one septegenarian hearbeat away from the Oval Office was far greater.
Logged

Your self-serving slacktivism is propelling America to new heights.
They call me PR
Progressive Realist
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5458
United States


View Profile
« Reply #93 on: August 07, 2010, 03:20:14 pm »
Ignore

She certainly didn't help him in places like Virginia and North Carolina and Florida.

She also mostly appealed to right-wingers in states that wouldn't vote for Obama anyway.

Horrible, horrible running mate.
Logged
Fmr. President & Senator Polnut
polnut
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13063
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #94 on: August 17, 2010, 08:23:19 am »
Ignore

The idea of a conservative woman as a running-mate is actually a masterstroke... Bush did very well with women in 2004 - but Palin was the wrong one...

She enthused hardcore conservatives... good, McCain's biggest weakness... but her clear lack of intellectual curiosity and her being an embodiment of all negative conservative stereotypes... sent moderates and liberals fleeing from McCain (groups that McCain could have eaten into).

I don't think Palin shifted votes to Obama from McCain- those who liked her were probably never going to vote for Obama. I do think her presence hurt McCain in NC, IN, OH, FL but I don't think it would have changed the results... but the size of the some of the margins.
Logged


Dogma is a comfortable thing, it saves you from thought - Sir Robert Menzies
Vepres
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8103
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.26, S: -7.39

View Profile
« Reply #95 on: September 04, 2010, 06:39:37 pm »
Ignore

Apparently if you subtract the number of people who didn't for McCain because of her from those that decided to turn out because of Palin, she helped McCain slightly.
Logged

LOL, Failure

Alright, if Republicans gain less than 75 seats, I'll prominently display my failure in my signature.
Liberalrocks
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 876
United States


View Profile
« Reply #96 on: December 19, 2010, 04:15:36 pm »
Ignore

Palin could have cost him key support in Florida in areas that voted for Bush but were reluctant to vote for Obama before she was placed on the ticket. I would have to say she cost McCain key support in the Philadelphia suburbs of Pennsylvania and in Allegahany County (Pittsburgh) although  some of the surrounding counties voted for Kerry in 04 then McCain in 08. So if he would have won the Philly suburbs he may have narrowly carried the state. Clinton carried this state by 10 pts thus the reason McCain had targeted it, he believed Obamas support was soft. The philly suburbs are areas that are trending less socially conservative then they were 20 years ago and Palin was a poor fit this in addition to being grossly unqualified for VP. She also killed McCain's chances in New Hampshire a state he had always been very popular and in a state where Clinton defeated Obama.

I think she helped him hold onto critical conservative support and turned them out in Montana and Missouri which helped McCain win those states very narrowly.

So when you total it up Pennsylvania, Florida, and New Hampshire were likely must wins for McCain and in my opinion she lost key votes for him in these places.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2010, 08:32:18 pm by Liberalrocks »Logged

"If Hillary gave Obama one of her balls they both would have two ! "-James Carville.....Hillary 2016 !
albaleman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2214
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.77, S: -4.52

View Profile
« Reply #97 on: December 19, 2010, 08:44:46 pm »
Ignore

She cost McCain enough votes to flip North Carolina, Indiana, and possibly Florida. She may have helped McCain with the Republican base, but she also alienated many Independents who would have likely voted for McCain otherwise.
Logged
GPORTER
gporter
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7152
United States


View Profile
« Reply #98 on: December 20, 2010, 10:23:34 pm »
Ignore

Sarah Palin is a wonderful person. Don't let the press fool u, shes a great gal.

But, she did cost McCain dearly. Lieberman was not the right running mate for him, but someone like Romney, Voinovich, or Pawlenty were good choices. With one of them, McCain could have held Colorado, Florida, North Carolina, Virgina, Indiana, and Ohio. That way, New Hampshire could have flipped the election to him. Then, he could have carried Pennsylvania, Michigan, Iowa, and maybe Nevada. That would be a great victory. However, Palin turned off a lot of swing voters and independent voters that were key to McCain doing the scenario above.

Romney, Voinovich, and Pawlenty were all solid running mates who would have helped McCain a ton. I think that McCain would have been surprised.

And with Clinton as the nominee...Washington, Oregon, Hawaii, Minnesota, Wisconsin, New Jersey, Maine...these all become battleground states. Just changing the running mate would have done wonders for McCain.
« Last Edit: December 20, 2010, 10:33:54 pm by GPORTER »Logged

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=195483.new#new
the birth of modern america & onward election president samuel tilden running for reelection is set to face james g. blane in the court of public opinion
Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29405
United States


View Profile
« Reply #99 on: December 20, 2010, 10:45:53 pm »
Ignore

Maybe some here or there, but its ridiculous to claim that McCain lost because of Palin or even lost a single state because of her. Maybe Indiana and North Carolina but thats it. The election turned the way it did because of the economic crisis.

Sarah Palin is a wonderful person. Don't let the press fool u, shes a great gal.

But, she did cost McCain dearly. Lieberman was not the right running mate for him, but someone like Romney, Voinovich, or Pawlenty were good choices. With one of them, McCain could have held Colorado, Florida, North Carolina, Virgina, Indiana, and Ohio. That way, New Hampshire could have flipped the election to him. Then, he could have carried Pennsylvania, Michigan, Iowa, and maybe Nevada. That would be a great victory. However, Palin turned off a lot of swing voters and independent voters that were key to McCain doing the scenario above.

Romney, Voinovich, and Pawlenty were all solid running mates who would have helped McCain a ton. I think that McCain would have been surprised.

And with Clinton as the nominee...Washington, Oregon, Hawaii, Minnesota, Wisconsin, New Jersey, Maine...these all become battleground states. Just changing the running mate would have done wonders for McCain.

Voinovich?
Far too old. McCain needed to balance age on the ticket not double down on it.

The McCain campaign didn't even anticipate that places like IN and VA would be as bad as they were and didn't put the effort he should have to counteract Obama's efforts in them. There was far more to McCain losing, then Palin. And he would have won with her had the economy not been heading down hill. Quayle didn't tank Bush 41 in 1988 and Palin would not have been enough on her own to sink McCain.
Logged

He's BACK!!! His Time Has Come Once Again! Now We're All Gonna Die! No One is Safe From His Wrath!



Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines