Could the Republicans have won in 2008?

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Was John McCain the best candidates that 2008 Republicans could have nominated? Was 2008 truly winnable for Republicans or was it a lost cause for them and an assured win for Democrats?

[TheElectoralBoobyPrize]

It was indeed a lost cause. McCain did as well as any Republican could've hoped in that environment.

For a similar election with the parties reversed, check out the 1920 election.

[sg0508]

Until the day that Lehman collapsed, that race was neck and neck. It was after Lehman that the economy really spiraled, Obama opened up a lead and never looked back.  I don't think any Republican was going to win in '08 given the outgoing president's disapproval ratings, the economic state in November, etc.  It all was the perfect storm for how the election turned out.  Then, choosing someone like Palin for your running mate didn't help matters.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Until the day that Lehman collapsed, that race was neck and neck. It was after Lehman that the economy really spiraled, Obama opened up a lead and never looked back.  I don't think any Republican was going to win in '08 given the outgoing president's disapproval ratings, the economic state in November, etc.  It all was the perfect storm for how the election turned out.  Then, choosing someone like Palin for your running mate didn't help matters.

Weren't McCain's advisers trying to nudge him into picking Romney as his VP? IIRC no one was expecting Sarah Palin to be his VP choice and most were assuming it would be Romney or Pawlenty or even Lieberman.

[sg0508]

Until the day that Lehman collapsed, that race was neck and neck. It was after Lehman that the economy really spiraled, Obama opened up a lead and never looked back.  I don't think any Republican was going to win in '08 given the outgoing president's disapproval ratings, the economic state in November, etc.  It all was the perfect storm for how the election turned out.  Then, choosing someone like Palin for your running mate didn't help matters.

Weren't McCain's advisers trying to nudge him into picking Romney as his VP? IIRC no one was expecting Sarah Palin to be his VP choice and most were assuming it would be Romney or Pawlenty or even Lieberman.

I'm not sure, but I don't think it would have made any difference in the end.

[Republican Michigander]

No, but it could have been closer (Indiana and North Carolina flipping).

McCain (who was disliked by much of the base AND much of the establishment outside of veterans and those who disliked Romney) ran the worst campaign I've ever seen. Palin gets the blame, but Palin 2008 was able to get some base to vote that would otherwise stay home. McCain needed SOMEBODY who could rally the base of a lifeless campaign.

While the polls were close at one point, the ground game for McCain was almost nonexistent.

[Green Line]

2008 was lost no matter who was the nominee, but picking anyone competent (not Palin) for VP would have gotten him another point. She had the most negative impact for a VP in history.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

McCain has always been a media oriented candidate and therefore there was no way that McCain could have beaten Obama. Certainly with the economic situation, McCain was out of his depth on the issue, having won the primary in a narrow window where Foreign Policy surged back to the fore (January and Feb 2008) at least as far as the GOP was concerned. Prior to that it had been immigration and then the economy. Rudy pulling out of New Hampshire allowed McCain to rally the indies, and he was further helped by people expecting Obama to win and thus voting in the NH GOP primary instead, helping lead to Clinton's victory there.

I think Romney could have won the election in 2008, because he could have painted Obama as a novice on business and the economy. However, 2012 doesn't exhibit much skill in maintaining a narrative. Likewise, Huckabee could have won running as a complete Washington outsider, provided he didn't get mired down in talk about his extreme positions on some social issues. Which of course, his history doesn't give one confidence either.

It is possible to win Presidential elections in terrible economic situations. 1876, 1908, 1936 come to mind. 1840, 1896, and 1932 get all the attention though.  There are two paths, you have to illustrate you are more competent to fix the economy or you run a complete outsider.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

I'm not sure how a hawkish candidate like McCain could have won in 2008 when the majority of Americans wanted a withdrawal from Iraq and were tired of the Bush doctrine.

[All Along The Watchtower]

"The fundamentals of our economy are strong."

-John McCain c. September 2008

[OSR stands with Israel]

No it was 1980 in reverse

[ElectionsGuy]

No. McCain or any Republican was going to lose big.

[Nym90]

No, but the Democrats could have lost if Obama had a scandal or major gaffe.

[Cryptic]

Maybe if John Edwards was the Democratic nominee. Otherwise, no.

[Nym90]

Maybe if John Edwards was the Democratic nominee. Otherwise, no.

Yes, especially since the Rielle Hunter scandal exploded that summer.

Makes for interesting speculation as to what the Democrats would have done if Edwards had won the primaries. The scandal broke after the primaries but before the convention. Would there have been a movement afoot to convince his delegates to deny Edwards the nomination and vote for someone else?

[TJ in Oregon]

2008 was lost no matter who was the nominee, but picking anyone competent (not Palin) for VP would have gotten him another point. She had the most negative impact for a VP in history.

McCain probably knew he was going to lose unless something else happened so he took a gamble on Palin to shake things up. It played out like most gambles: a loss.

[Bojack Horseman]

Yeah I think 2008 for the Republicans was kind of like 1984 for the Democrats, in that the losing party could have nominated Jesus Christ and gotten the same result.

[MATTROSE94]

Only if John Kerry won in 2004.

[TheElectoralBoobyPrize]

Only if John Kerry won in 2004.

Best answer lol. And Democrats could have only won in 1980 had Ford won in 1976.

[hopper]

No it was 1980 in reverse

Yeah basically the end of "The Reagan Era policies" and now we are in the era of "Progressivism".

[hopper]

2008 was lost no matter who was the nominee, but picking anyone competent (not Palin) for VP would have gotten him another point. She had the most negative impact for a VP in history.

McCain probably knew he was going to lose unless something else happened so he took a gamble on Palin to shake things up. It played out like most gambles: a loss.

True.

[DS0816]

Was John McCain the best candidates that 2008 Republicans could have nominated? Was 2008 truly winnable for Republicans or was it a lost cause for them and an assured win for Democrats?

No.

The incumbent United States president, George W. Bush, had a job-approval percentage rating that was as welcoming as a sexual disease which infected a huge percentage of the nation.

If LibertarianRepublican, who started this thread, needs clarification, I would suggest he/she do some research which informs him/her as to what was happening seven years ago. It's such a long time ago that it might as well be seven decades ago.


Speaking of a long time ago…


This answer also applies to any forum member wanting to start a thread which asks, "Could the Republicans have won in 1932?"

[muon2]

2008 was lost no matter who was the nominee, but picking anyone competent (not Palin) for VP would have gotten him another point. She had the most negative impact for a VP in history.

McCain probably knew he was going to lose unless something else happened so he took a gamble on Palin to shake things up. It played out like most gambles: a loss.

True.

His VP pick did reengage an important part of the GOP base that was prepared to sit on the sidelines. That part of the base did show up to vote, but it was way too little in the face of all the other factors swirling around those last couple of months.

[Torie]

The Lehman Bros collapse and McCain's reaction to it I think was the coup de grace for McCain. It certainly was for me. When McCain, in sort of an insouciant way, said he did not know much about finance as the markets were in chaos, I said to myself, I agree, and I'm not voting for you. It was part of an overall lack of confidence in his management style. He struck me as too much of a shooting from the hip type, who acted on instinct. The way he handled his VP pick was part of the process that I eroded my confidence in McCain.

[/]

Pretty much like 1980; unpopular incumbent causes other party to win in landslide with a charismatic, ideological candidate.