Posted by
Meege on Wednesday, November 05, 2008 10:56:14 AM
Now, don't get me wrong. I LOVE Sarah Palin. I was inspired by her example of the true conservative woman. But, unfortunately, my vote was never in question in this election. And because of that fact, the selection of Sarah Palin was, in my opinion, the shot in the foot that sank this campaign.
Some have argued that Sarah Palin provided the passion among the core Republican base that McCain could not. In an election where energy was high among the Democratic base, and new voter turnout was going to be the story, I can't fault John McCain for concluding that drastic measures were needed to generate an equal energy among the Republican base. But I believe that Barack Obama would have provided more than enough incentive to drive Republicans to the polls. I think McCain underestimated just how strong the anti-Obama incentive would be. No, we didn't need a VP who would energize our base, we needed a VP who would attract moderate voters, be they Independent or Democrat. Not only did Sarah Palin fail to attract these voters, she actually pushed many of them toward Barack Obama. In any election, it is always, always, always about attracting the moderate voters. No increase in voter turnout could have overcome our advantage had we been able to attract the voters that should have come our way when faced with the least experienced and most liberal candidate ever to run for president.
John McCain is a maverick, and a risk taker. But in this election, when Democrats were taking a huge risk on their candidate, risk was the last thing we needed. The Republicans needed to be the safe, comfortable alternative to Barack Obama. A choice like Mitt Romney or Rudy Giuliani would, I believe, have reversed the result of this election. McCain/Romney or McCain/Giuliani would have been a moderate voter's dream-team. Sarah Palin, it turns out, was exactly what the Democrats needed to nullify the biggest negatives of their candidate. Barack Obama was a risky candidate because of his inexperience, his overwhelmingly liberal record, and the negative impact of racial bias. We nullified that by selecting a VP candidate who was seen as less experienced and less qualified, too conservative for many moderates, and who exposed the ticket to gender bias.
The choice of Palin, I think, was intended to attract Hillary Democrats. That voting block was to be our ace in the hole. It wasn't clear until the end whether we would attract that block. Had we done so, this result would have been reversed. But clearly we did not. Hillary Democrats went for Obama by about 85%. I believe that, though Sarah Palin helped to attract some of them, like the high profile Lynn Forester De Rothchild, she was a powerful disincentive for most Hillary Democrats who might otherwise have been more inclined to elect the moderate McCain over the far too liberal Obama. The fact is, Sarah Palin is not a suitable replacement for Hillary Clinton. In many ways, she is the anti-Clinton. And for those who are passionate about getting Hillary Clinton elected in the future, electing Sarah Palin in this election would have been the equivalent of closing the door on Hillary forever. So, far from being an incentive for them to vote McCain, the selection of Sarah Palin forced them to put aside their animosity toward Obama. It gave them a personal interest in seeing him elected, and that's the last thing we needed to do.
I can think of no candidate better suited to pave the way for Barack Obama's election, and I said as much the day she was selected. I find absolutely no fault in Sarah Palin, and as a conservative Republican, I will support her passionately. But I do believe it was a strategic blunder to select her for this campaign. The rule of VP selection is, first, do no harm. By guaranteeing that a majority of moderate independents and moderate Democrats would vote for Obama, Sarah Palin, I must conclude, made John McCain unelectable.