Patterico's Pontifications

11/5/2008

Palin-Bashing by McCain Staffers

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 10:30 pm



Interesting stuff at Hot Air about McCain staffers taking potshots at Sarah Palin in the big Blame Game.

I have no idea what actually happened. I know only this: some of the McCain staffers were taking potshots at Palin while the campaign was still going on. I don’t get paid to blog full-time, and when I first heard about this, I didn’t have time to comment on my appalled reaction. But I’ll do so now.

Let’s assume that every nasty thing they’re saying about Sarah Palin is true. It’s still unbelievable that staffers would be leaking that kind of stuff during the critical moments of a presidential campaign.

The people responsible should be rooted out and should never be allowed to work for a campaign again.

94 Responses to “Palin-Bashing by McCain Staffers”

  1. Evidently, these “educated” and “sophisticated” staffers don’t know you shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds you. If they want to undermine the Republican party, then do so while on the Democrat’s payroll. Furthermore, these staffers are too cowardly to go on the public record. So much for “Country First.”

    Perfect Sense (9d1b08)

  2. Find them and fire them.

    Evil Pundit (843b74)

  3. As Newsweek reports, McCain’s staff was terrible at running a campaign, and McCain was even worse:

    “On the Sunday night before the last debate, McCain’s core group of advisers—Steve Schmidt, Rick Davis, adman Fred Davis, strategist Greg Strimple, pollster Bill McInturff and strategy director Sarah Simmons—met to decide whether to tell McCain that the race was effectively over, that he no longer had a chance to win. The consensus in the room was no, not yet, not while he still had “a pulse.”

    [snip]

    “Palin launched her attack on Obama’s association with William Ayers, the former Weather Underground bomber, before the campaign had finalized a plan to raise the issue. . .McCain had not signed off on it, and top adviser Mark Salter was resisting.”

    [snip]

    “McCain also was reluctant to use Obama’s incendiary pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, as a campaign issue. The Republican had set firm boundaries: no Jeremiah Wright; no attacking Michelle Obama; no attacking Obama for not serving in the military. McCain balked at an ad using images of children that suggested that Obama might not protect them from terrorism. Schmidt vetoed ads suggesting that Obama was soft on crime (no Willie Hortons). And before word even got to McCain, Schmidt and Salter scuttled a “celebrity” ad of Obama dancing with talk-show host Ellen DeGeneres (the sight of a black man dancing with a lesbian was deemed too provocative).”

    Loser!

    [re-post from Internet thread]

    Official Internet Data Office (df6254)

  4. An Odd story that’s getting odder. Here’s the intro to a CNN article today:

    “Randy Scheunemann, a senior foreign policy adviser to John McCain, was fired from the Arizona senator’s campaign last week for what one aide called “trashing” the campaign staff, three senior McCain advisers tell CNN.

    One of the aides tells CNN that campaign manager Rick Davis fired Scheunemann after determining that he had been in direct contact with journalists spreading “disinformation” about campaign aides, including Nicolle Wallace and other officials.

    “He was positioning himself with Palin at the expense of John McCain’s campaign message,” said one of the aides.”

    DRJ (cb68f2)

  5. The Campaign Spot at NRO has a good post on the Sarah Palin effect and how it helped or hurt the McCain candidacy.

    JVW (f93297)

  6. “On the Sunday night before the last debate, McCain’s core group of advisers—Steve Schmidt, Rick Davis, adman Fred Davis, strategist Greg Strimple, pollster Bill McInturff and strategy director Sarah Simmons—met to decide whether to tell McCain that the race was effectively over, that he no longer had a chance to win.”

    Man, that’s telling right there, explains a lot of what happened to the McCain campaign over the last few weeks. In a contest as big and important as an election, even if each person privately thinks it’s over, you don’t sit around as a team and agree it’s over. Even if everyone thinks it is over, the collective attitude when speaking amongst the group has to be there is still a longshot chance if everyone works hard and smart and luck breaks the right way. For example, this week Baylor plays Texas. Every Baylor player and the coach probably privately believe they won’t actually win, but I’m sure they aren’t sitting around as a group discussing their defeat. Instead I bet they are pumping each other up and working as hard as ever as a team on the slim chance of a gigantic upset and talking about how awesome that would be.

    That’s especially shocking considering it came before the last debate, when there was still a chance Obama could have made some fatal gaffe. I could see giving up as a group say last Friday, when there pretty much wasn’t anything either side could do any longer to change opinions, but things were still in play before that final debate.

    Aplomb (b6fba6)

  7. Was it a ‘leak’ about the 150k Palin wardrobe? I wasn’t really paying attention to it when the story broke and assumed that the figures were just part of campaign disclosure filing and someone OUTSIDE the McCain campaign picked up on it.
    Did someone INSIDE the McCain campaign leak the Palin wardrobe cost?

    liontooth (0edfdb)

  8. You guys should read up on Ace’s new updates on these stories…

    Lord Nazh (899dce)

  9. Yes, they screwed up but more attack ads weren’t going to do it, especially as they did it. Even if you argue that attack ads were the way to go (since the press had it’s blinders on), they never connected the dots to show a pattern of associations, so it just looked like a jumble of personal attacks to the average viewer.

    No, they screwed up coming out of the gate following the convention. They should have let Palin “roll out” on her own, to keep the base happy, while letting McCain be McCain with the center.

    Instead they tried to move Palin to the center and McCain to the base. Oddly, it didn’t work.

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  10. It is our expressed intention to make these few people political lepers.

    Don’t make us add you to our list. Do you really want to be next to Kathleen Parker in the leper colony?

    http://www.redstate.com/diaries/erick/2008/nov/05/operation-leper/

    Let the healing begin?

    snuffles (677ec2)

  11. fluffer wrote: Let the healing begin?

    Yeah. Like the Dems bonded with Joe Lieberman.

    L.N. Smithee (41cab4)

  12. So lots of people were mad that the LA times was sitting on a tape. And now we find out that Foxnews was sitting on the fact that Palin is a bigger moron than we thought; and refused to listen to people more experienced than her in campaigns and media handling.

    That’s just how it is. Promises to sources.

    imdw (1bdbee)

  13. As someone pointed out last night, asshats like imdw are sad people. Not content with their historic win, they are still out trolling and lying about their opponents.

    JD (008a90)

  14. Picking Palin was a bad move. A nice lady with some decent accomplishments, but the job of a vice presidential nominee is to help the candidate with a bloc of needed voters. And as much as the rabid right might like to argue they would have sat this out, they wouldn’t have as they hate Obama (and his supporters) more than they dislike McCain; it’s a fiction that a Republican candidate has to prostrate himself to the right in order to win. And as I am sure we’re going to see in the recaps, Palin brought nobody new to the McCain side of the ledger and may in fact have cost McCain votes from groups he may ordinarily have hoped/expected to win.

    Having said that, it was terribly stupid and disloyal to publicly bad mouth her during the campaign. When you work for someone, as the McCain staffers did, you may not always agree with the decision but taking a paycheck means shutting up and getting with the program and doing everything possible to win.

    It’s a tad ironic (?) that both McCain and Bush, valuing loyalty so much, were undermined so badly by disloyal staffers and appointees.

    stevesturm (369bc6)

  15. When reports of Palin changing from maverick to “rogue” surfaced it was apparent that McCain staffers were throwing in the towel. Then came reports of her weak interviews that could just as reasonably been laid at the feet of gotcha questions by the interviewer and disloyal McCain advisors. Another telling event was when the wardrobe costs were publicized. Then to compound the wardrobe non-issue Palin was criticized for shopping for her own clothes; shopaholic?

    They assisted in vetting Palin from the beginning and were responsible to McCain for seeing to it that her strengths were put to use. Instead, they threw her under the bus from the beginning and arguably engaged in sabotaging the campaign the minute Palin was chosen.

    This whole episode does not pass the smell test! In McCain’s language, they were supposed to cover his “6” and not their own. McCain counted on their loyalty because he chose them. From a military standpoint, once part of the team, these folks owed their allegiance to victory for their boss. Instead, they “Fragged” him.

    vet66 (d8da01)

  16. #15: “Palin brought nobody new to the McCain side of the ledger”

    Palin brought me by being anti-corruption, pro-life, and pro-drilling, in contrast to McCain’s mishmash of pandering on those issues. It’s a fact that the ONLY way he got my vote was his choice of Sarah Palin as his running mate.

    But perhaps, as you purport to explain who would or would not have voted, you don’t refer to me, since I’m not “rabid”.

    brobin (c07c20)

  17. I read that it was Romney’s people planting the stories … trying to block her chances for 2012.

    Vermont Neighbor (c91cfe)

  18. Sorry to tell the Trolls this, but Palin has been underestimated and ridiculed her entire political life, only to prove her critics and doubters wrong at the end. Watch what happens, and wallow in your unending bitterness.

    Dmac (e30284)

  19. #15:
    Picking Palin was not a bad move–she was picked to fire up the conservative base, attract PUMAs and bring attention to Obama’s lack of executive experience. That the Democrats and the MSM went monkey-s**t over her selection was an added bonus, as it pointed out the sexism of the left and allowed McCain to look presidential while the Obama camp sniped at the VP pick.

    The problem came when the McCain camp decided to hide her away until she had memorized McCain’s positions. Her strength was in her ideals and how she made decisions using them, both as governor and as mayor. Her seclusion and the attempt to re-make her into a “mini-McCain” essentially reinforced the Democrat/MSM argument that she was unprepared and neutralized her leadership experience. Forcing her to parrot McCain’s positions instead of thinking for herself stripped her of the feminine independence and confidence that appealed to the PUMAs. By the end of the campaign, she was merely there to fire up the base (which was with her from her selection) instead of reaching across the aisle to pull in those undecided or wavering voters–a significant asset wasted.

    Joel (e2d9a6)

  20. I voted for Palin in spite of the old guy.

    unseen (f8f32d)

  21. Comment by Joel — 11/6/2008 @ 7:16 am

    agreed.

    unseen (f8f32d)

  22. Who vetted the staffers?

    Thomas (1c2383)

  23. McCain’s pick of Palin was brilliant.

    The campaign’s usage of Palin was poor.

    The backstabbing of Palin now is shitty.

    Let’s review the progression:

    Brilliant -> poor -> shitty.

    CW Desiato (614aa7)

  24. If this is what McCain’s staffers were spending their time doing, then it is no surprise that they got their asses handed to them.

    Carl Cameron should be embarassed.

    JD (008a90)

  25. Some of these staffers – McCain loyalists – may look at the loss and say to themselves, “gee, someone’s going to get blamed for this, so we’d better point the finger at Palin, to head off any blame falling on McCain.” Some of these staffers may look at the loss and say to themselves, “gee, someone’s going to get blamed for this, so we’d better point the finger at Palin, otherwise people might blame the campaign staff, and I don’t want service in this staff to be a millstone around my neck.” Still other staffers may by once and future Romney staffers and supporters and recognize that they have an opportunity to wound Palin’s chances of beating Romney in four years, should they both run.

    One thing you can be quite sure of, however, is that this stuff isn’t on the level. Are we really to believe, as this video claims, that Palin can’t name the countries in North America? Please. That doesn’t even pass the laugh test.

    Simon (fb192d)

  26. If this did indeed happen, it is a sad thing. They’re probably trying to stump for a spot in Obama’s leftist illuminati cabinet.

    Jeff (7082b1)

  27. #17: For every one of you who claim that you wouldn’t have voted for McCain without his having picked Palin (a claim that I very much discount as, collectively, your dislike for the Democrats outweighs any unhappiness with a particular GOP candidate), it will turn out that he lost 2-3 or even more votes from the mushy middle whose votes he needed to win. As a said, a bad move to pick her.

    And to the specifics of your post, McCain is pro-life and anti-corruption, so why wouldn’t hde have had your vote by himself, why did he need to pick Palin to prove his bona fides on those issues? And to the extent Palin disagrees with McCain on any given issue, how smart are you if you decided to vote for McCain based on Palin’s views when those views weren’t shared by McCain? Did you think that McCain was going to abandon his views and adopt Palin’s positions? Or were you voting for McCain, hoping he would die in office and the candidate you really liked would take over?

    stevesturm (369bc6)

  28. And to the extent Palin disagrees with McCain on any given issue, how smart are you if you decided to vote for McCain based on Palin’s views when those views weren’t shared by McCain?

    Well, they’re shared even less by Obama. In a McCain administration, they’d at least be at the table. So, that’s pretty reasonable.

    Pablo (99243e)

  29. Per Rich Lowry, citing exit polls, Obama won the ‘moderates’ by a 60-39 margin.

    C’mon, don’t be shy, raise your hands, how many of you think McCain didn’t lose a whole heck of a lot of these millions of voters because he nominated as VP someone so loved by the right wing? Every time a moderate hears a hard conservative gush for someone, that moderate rethinks his support for that candidate.

    I know it’s hard to accept, but not everybody in the country looks at life the way you (we) do, and to many of these voters, your liking something or someone is a good enough reason for them to dislike it. Nominating Palin got you all hot and excited but it also alienated – perhaps for another two election cycles – the moderate voters who you so disparage but whose votes you very much need if you want to ever win another election. If you all were truly the majority, you could do what you want and still win, but the right is a minority (affirmative action for conservatives!) and unless you find a way of bringing in the moderates, you’re destined to wander round the desert.

    stevesturm (369bc6)

  30. And that goes double for the idiots who took the call from the Canadian DJs and put Sarah on the phone.

    Kaleen (4d7f4b)

  31. I understand why the left does not like Palin, what I am having trouble grasping is why the middle would dislike her. To make this more troublesome, she has like an 85 to 90% approval rating in her state, so that would include the right, middle, and some of the left.

    Thomas (1c2383)

  32. “It will turn out he lost 2-3 or even more votes…” doesn’t translate to “As a said, a bad move to pick her.” First, your premise has to be correct.

    “McCain is Pro-life and anti-corruption, so why…?” Squishy pro-life (what if he had a chance to look cool to the NYT crowd?); anti-corruption translated as anti-free speech, not quite my cup of tea; you left off drilling in order to bolster your argument. Palin lives pro-life, took on corrupt Republicans, and is far firmer in her drilling position.

    “How smart are you…?” Smart enough to notice that the either you’re stupid/or you wish for McCain’s death choice is a false one. I didn’t agree with McCain on these (and other) issues; however his selection of Palin offered some reassurance that he would at least give them further consideration. After all, he could have picked Romney, Pawlenty or even Lieberman. It seemed a good faith effort to reach out to people with whom he had disagreements, and I appreciated the overture enough to re-consider my decision to withhold my vote.

    brobin (c07c20)

  33. Thomas: absent the ability to get to know her one on one / see her in action, voters can only go on the basis of stereotypes, and with Palin being the darling of the right, that was enough for those unwilling or unable to dig further to dislike her.

    I know I’m repeating myself, but the right is very much disliked by not just liberals but by a whole lot in the middle, and a GOP candidate has to convince the middle he is more like them than the right… and picking Palin didn’t do that for McCain.

    And by the way, it wasn’t THE reason he lost.

    stevesturm (369bc6)

  34. Who are these so-called “moderates,” anyway? To me, they’re voters who are politically unfocused, like to go with the flow, and watch too much television.

    Official Internet Data Office (df6254)

  35. Political loyalty….

    The McCain staffers who gleefully stab Gov. Palin in the back, need to be reminded that when Ed Rollins went “off the reservation” some time back and trashed his own candidate, he is still wandering in the wilderness, consigned to second-tier candidates (if even that), and is hardly ever seen on TV for his expert opinion.
    This from the guy who brilliantly CO’ed the Reagan re-election in ’84.
    I think these names should be compiled, and they should be Black-Listed for their disloyalty.

    Without Sarah Palin, I would never have voted FOR John McCain, too many scars from the past 8-years. I would still have voted AGAINST Obama, but there were other alternatives than McCain.

    Another Drew (57deb8)

  36. For every one of you who claim that you wouldn’t have voted for McCain without his having picked Palin (a claim that I very much discount as, collectively, your dislike for the Democrats outweighs any unhappiness with a particular GOP candidate), it will turn out that he lost 2-3 or even more votes from the mushy middle whose votes he needed to win. As a said, a bad move to pick her.

    Comment by stevesturm — 11/6/2008 @ 7:51 am

    I call bullshit on that.

    Explain then McCain’s “bounce” after the convention. Explain the huge, I daresay “Obama-like” crowds that turned out to see Palin.

    It could be that _you_ don’t like Palin but please don’t pretend she was a lodestone on McCain’s campaign.

    The lodestone on McCain’s campaign was him and his staff.

    CW Desiato (614aa7)

  37. CW – This is steve being steve.

    JD (008a90)

  38. Comment by stevesturm — 11/6/2008 @ 8:21 am

    I would just remind you that elections are supposed to be about
    “A Choice, Not An Echo”.

    Democrat-Lite is a prescription to permanent minority status
    (see: 1930-1994, w/exceptions, which as we know, usually prove the rule).

    Another Drew (57deb8)

  39. #CW – This is steve being steve.

    Comment by JD — 11/6/2008 @ 8:30 am

    Does that mean we can call bullshit without being racist?

    CW Desiato (614aa7)

  40. CW Desiato: i’m a social liberal who is centrist on economic issues. I have voted for Sen. McCain in the past. This general orientation describes much of my social network.

    Every single person I know who falls into this group was appalled by Gov. Palin. Even those of us who started off with an open mind had concluded, by early October, that she was nowhere near sufficiently knowledgeable about national and international affairs to be a good candidate for the vice Presidency … and that her nomination made it difficult to vote for Sen. McCain, because if he’d appoint her to this position, what other similarly poor appointments could we count on him to make if elected?

    You don’t have to believe me; I am not, after all, a conservative, or a republican. But I *am* part of the group who could have been persuaded to vote for Sen. McCain despite being neither a conservative nor a republican, and I’m telling you that Gov. Palin seriously hurt Sen. McCain’s standing with us.

    aphrael (9e8ccd)

  41. aphrael – What is appalling about Gov. Palin?

    JD (008a90)

  42. I agree with Steve Sturm if maybe for different reasons. I don’t think any woman can win national office. Men don’t like taking orders from women. Not many women neither.

    As for the post-convention bounce, she was refreshing and exciting. And gave hope to people looking for any straw to grasp who were never going to vote for Obama anyway.

    Now that the election is over, I can honestly say that although I voted for her I neither respect her nor trust her as much as I respect and trust McCain. But still more than I respect and trust Obama.

    nk (95bfab)

  43. McCain campaign incompetent:
    Ordered 10 yard signs for myself and neighbors. One week later got an email they would be sent “sometime in the future”. I called McCain HQ here in Phoenix. Was told they were getting lots of these calls – make my own signs. The signs arrived 3 weeks later!
    Tried to donate online 3 separate times – the site didn’t work any of those times. Each time I donated elsewhere.
    NR reports no phones or computers in Pennsylvania.
    Was Sarah in charge of all of this? Wow, she must have been busy!
    How much do you think America “likes” leftist socialists? McCain staff didn’t do opposition research – it all came from bloggers – nor did they get the facts out. Interesting stats @ NR on how much McCain’s poll numbers went up after Palin pick, but crashed after handling of financial crisis? Palin’s fault?
    I read McCain’s staffers wanted him to “lose with honor”. What a great campaign motto! You can’t win a war fighting bullets with water pistols. The same is true in a campaign.

    S Mulder (6569a3)

  44. Not content with the shredding we got in the election, we are now eating each other. I stopped reading NRO when Parker wrote her last, and nastiest, hit piece on Palin, and the ever idiotic K-Lo had the nerve to write on the corner that the article was “heart breaking.” Note that K-Lo is the editor, but she’s too stupid to know what editors do. This was after months of going after McCain at every opportunity, then disingenuously whining, “What, I can’t criticize my own candidate?” when some reader would call her on it. But it wasn’t just NRO. It was all over the blogosphere. McCain Derangement Syndrome. Palin Derangement Syndrome. Everybody, and always in the name of “pure conservatism,” doing everything they could to bring down the Republican ticket.

    I’ve been a Republican since the first election I voted in, in 1972. We used to be pragmatic. In the last eight years, we’ve become ideologues, and to hell with realism. Shamnesty! Send them all back to Mexico! Yeah, like that’s ever going to happen. The party is full of people who are completely out of touch with reality.

    If I see a candidate I like, I’ll campaign for him and donate. Otherwise, I’m done, at least until the adults come back to the party. How’d ideology work for the LP? Then, there’s all the Reagan references, often to things that Reagan would never have supported, by people who were at the oldest in diapers when Reagan was in the White House.

    Anyway, there’s football and hockey to watch. Much better than watching people tear each other up over who’s the “real” coservative.

    rightwingprof (fbb932)

  45. JD: thanks

    #35: you’re spot on. moderates include those who don’t pay much attention to the ‘issues’, those who aren’t following the day to day campaign promises, and a lot who are swayed by what they read and see in the MSM, their more active friends and so on. And dis them as you may, we need their votes.

    CW: The crowds for Palin? Easy, full of conservatives. Yes, there are enough of them to fill an arena. By definition, moderates don’t go to political rallies. And the bounce? The traditional bump from people liking the carefully organized spectacle. They tune in to see McCain, just how much red meat was he serving?

    while Palin didn’t help and did hurt, she hurt him less than he hurt himself by being such a doofus when it comes to understanding and articulating a coherent economic policy that appeals to moderates. And the people who really should take the blame are the GOP fools who voted for him in the primaries. God, he was awful, it was like watching Dole all over again.

    stevesturm (369bc6)

  46. Now that the election is over, I can honestly say that although I voted for her I neither respect her nor trust her as much as I respect and trust McCain. But still more than I respect and trust Obama.

    I tend to agree with that observation. Her style is great but we need a real intellectual heavyweight combined with that kind of charisma.
    I think McCain is a shining example for many and his values are commonly found in his generation. Our younger gen could take a few lessons from him.

    voiceofreason2 (590c85)

  47. “. . .she was nowhere near sufficiently knowledgeable about national and international affairs”

    And this, of course, must have been based on the highly-edited interviews of Palin you saw on your television set, conducted by Couric and Gibson. You forgot about Biden’s idea that FDR was president in 1929 and went on television that year, and Obama’s concept that there are 57 states in the US.

    Now, where is that special exam given to determine whether a VP candidate has sufficient knowledge? During freshman year at Harvard? Harry Truman didn’t take that test. Maybe that’s what Kerry meant by “global test.”

    Official Internet Data Office (df6254)

  48. #

    CW Desiato: i’m a social liberal who is centrist on economic issues. I have voted for Sen. McCain in the past. This general orientation describes much of my social network.

    Every single person I know who falls into this group was appalled by Gov. Palin. Even those of us who started off with an open mind had concluded, by early October, that she was nowhere near sufficiently knowledgeable about national and international affairs to be a good candidate for the vice Presidency … and that her nomination made it difficult to vote for Sen. McCain, because if he’d appoint her to this position, what other similarly poor appointments could we count on him to make if elected?

    You don’t have to believe me; I am not, after all, a conservative, or a republican. But I *am* part of the group who could have been persuaded to vote for Sen. McCain despite being neither a conservative nor a republican, and I’m telling you that Gov. Palin seriously hurt Sen. McCain’s standing with us.

    Comment by aphrael — 11/6/2008 @ 8:36 am

    I appreciate your thought but my anecdotal experience with Sarah Palin is the exact opposite of yours. My wife and I had rehearsed our “hold nose with one hand, vote McCain with the other” up until the week of the RNC. When the choice of Palin started leaking, my wife was dancing a jig. Pretty much all of my neighbors around here felt the same way, McCain: great American hero, lousy conservative. Palin: “F yeah!”

    No, she’s not up on national and international affairs right now. She can learn about those issues and I’m confident she will in the next few years. What she has that Republicans (and I’m not talking about the feckless douchebags in McCain’s campaign, I’m talking about constituents) desperately want is her ability to connect with “the folks” and her desire to take on the establishment.

    CW Desiato (614aa7)

  49. Now, where is that special exam given to determine whether a VP candidate has sufficient knowledge?

    In order to pass that test, one must plagarize one’s own life story, think that giving Iran $200,000,000,000 post 9/11 was a good idea, think partitioning off Iraq was a great idea, think that President FDR started calling people on the phone in 1929, etc …

    JD (008a90)

  50. C’mon, don’t be shy, raise your hands, how many of you think McCain didn’t lose a whole heck of a lot of these millions of voters because he nominated as VP someone so loved by the right wing? Every time a moderate hears a hard conservative gush for someone, that moderate rethinks his support for that candidate.

    Yes, by all means take advice from someone who was not going to vote for a Republican. Sarah Palin’s attraction is related to that of Joe the Plumber. She is able to relate to middle class people who don’t live in the DC area and don’t work for the federal government. If you are a pro-abortion voter, and that’s what you sound like, you were not going to vote for McCain anyway.

    I know it’s hard to accept, but not everybody in the country looks at life the way you (we) do, and to many of these voters, your liking something or someone is a good enough reason for them to dislike it.

    Now there’s a brilliant analysis. You, no doubt, are among those who will blindly, like the jerking of a knee when the patellar tendon is tapped, dislike anything a Republican likes.

    OK Got it.

    Nominating Palin got you all hot and excited but it also alienated – perhaps for another two election cycles – the moderate voters who you so disparage but whose votes you very much need if you want to ever win another election. If you all were truly the majority, you could do what you want and still win, but the right is a minority (affirmative action for conservatives!) and unless you find a way of bringing in the moderates, you’re destined to wander round the desert.

    Comment by stevesturm

    Note how he finally gets to the use of the pronoun, “you”? This is advice from an enemy politically. Treat it appropriately.

    Also, I suggest using a glossary to interpret terms used by people like this. Where he says “moderate”, read “pro-abortion.”

    That makes it all clear. All the Republican party has to do is become a second Democratic party and Steve will approve.

    There will be a lot of analysis of the election. Steve’s contribution is not part of it. It is just bad advice from someone who wants to see us lose.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  51. Right now Sarah Palin represents the future of the Conservative Movement. Without her the GOP loses enough support from Conservatives to keep Republicans in the minority for the next several decades.

    Stupid is as stupid does, and if the GOP is anything, it’s the stupid party. Everyone knows it because they prove it so often. What we are seeing here is nothing less than the GOP’s very own version of the Jackass Party’s traditional circular firing squad.

    On a related matter: Leftists don’t have any insight into Conservative thought, none at all, they don’t understand who we are, or what we think, or why we think it. Conservatives simply do not respond like Democrats, yet some commenters continue to expect Conservatives will behave according to their presumptions. It’s silly, but they keep doing it.

    Ropelight (1c7bd1)

  52. CW: The crowds for Palin? Easy, full of conservatives.

    And what were the crowds for Obama? Fred Barnes clones? Ex-dittoheads?

    Palin attracted a sizable number of PUMAs.

    Yes, there are enough of them to fill an arena. By definition, moderates don’t go to political rallies.

    Which was the whole problem with McCain, he’s a moderate. He _needed_ the base to be energized. Were people going to come out and see Tim Pawlenty?

    And the bounce? The traditional bump from people liking the carefully organized spectacle. They tune in to see McCain, just how much red meat was he serving?

    So why didn’t Obama get a similar bounce with all his “spectacle”?

    while Palin didn’t help and did hurt,

    She was a net positive for McCain. Without her, McCain would’ve seen the loss people were predicting.

    she hurt him less than he hurt himself by being such a doofus when it comes to understanding and articulating a coherent economic policy that appeals to moderates.

    Change “moderates” to “conservatives” and we’ll agree. And yes, his articulation of economic matters was poor.

    And the people who really should take the blame are the GOP fools who voted for him in the primaries. God, he was awful, it was like watching Dole all over again.

    Comment by stevesturm — 11/6/2008 @ 8:40 am

    Well, that won’t have been me. I was for Romney and I think Romney would’ve won given the financial crisis. He could’ve said he had nothing to do with it because he wasn’t in Washington and gone back to his extensive experience of managing big-budget efforts.

    CW Desiato (614aa7)

  53. The people responsible should be rooted out and should never be allowed to work for a campaign again.

    I heartily agree. Some of these staffers are careerists, not partisans. They’re hacks. They were trying to put the blame on someone else and screwed up their party even more.

    Patricia (ee5c9d)

  54. Without her the GOP loses enough support from Conservatives to keep Republicans in the minority for the next several decades.

    And yet, the Republicans will never win anything with Palin on the ticket.

    Oh, the irony.

    snuffles (677ec2)

  55. sniffles/alphie – When we want your opinion, we will kick you in the nuts.

    JD (008a90)

  56. I thought snuffles would have given up by now. Why not go over to your natural allies at Daily Kos and celebrate. There are people here trying to plan for the future without tripping over trolls crawling around.

    A sensible and thoughtful piece on the election and the Palin nomination can be be found here. I’ll pass on the offer to take advice from lefties.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  57. How’s it feel to be a troll, JD?

    To have your entire political ideology soundly rejected by America.

    Must be rough.

    I’d crank up the mindless nastiness if I were you.

    snuffles (677ec2)

  58. 53:

    And the bounce? The traditional bump from people liking the carefully organized spectacle. They tune in to see McCain, just how much red meat was he serving?

    So why didn’t Obama get a similar bounce with all his “spectacle”?

    Because the morning after Obama’s spectacle, McCain’s selection of Palin stole the limelight. Which in fact reinforces your point: we knew that McCain was announcing his pick the day after Obama’s speech, but if you look at the print media from that morning, and the morning shows before the rumors started flying that McCain might actually have picked Palin, they were fawning over Obama’s speech. If nothing else had happened that day, they would have continued fawning through Friday and into the weekend, and the coverage of the RNC would have alternated between hurricane coverage and more fawning over Obama’s speech and how much better it was than ___’s speech at the RNC. If McCain had picked someone bland like Pawlenty or Romney, ditto – it would have made barely a dent in the coverage. But the selection of Palin wrenched Obama’s speech out of the news cycle; for better and worse, she was THE focal point of coverage through the weekend and into the RNC. I think that’s why Obama had a limited bounce – because McCain seized the news cycle and distracted attention away from Obama’s speech.

    Simon (fb192d)

  59. Do you know what a troll is, sniffles, or is your mirror cracked beyond repair?

    JD (008a90)

  60. To have your entire political ideology soundly rejected by America.

    Let’s hold a seance and ask FDR.

    nk (95bfab)

  61. The GOP could win every nearly every election if lots of Democrats didn’t vote 4 or 5 times each, or register the dead, or bus illegals to the polls. ACORN stole this election for Barrak Obama.

    Democrats oppose any all Identification Requirements for voters so they can keep cheating at the polls and stealing elections.

    Ropelight (1c7bd1)

  62. Mike K (51) I sure hope you’re better at your day job than you are in figuring out me and my motivations.

    I ‘want to see us lose’? Then why the f**k did I vote for McCain? Why have I voted for a Republican in every Presidential election since I was 18? (Ford in 76, for those who care to count). Yeah, I really want Democrats to raise my taxes, interfere with my business and make me and my family less safe.

    But go ahead, and stick to your (collective) delusion that the only reason GOP candidates lose is because they’re not sufficiently conservative, that McCain would have won if only he had let Sarah be Sarah. How can you all be so stupid? Moderates, by definition, are NOT going to be excited about the same things that true believers are. And if you want their votes, you’re going to have to reach out to them, and picking Palin didn’t do that. Obama was smart enough to disguise his radical leanings (with an assist from the MSM) in order to not alienate moderates and he won as a result.

    stevesturm (369bc6)

  63. I’d say a troll is anyone who represents the Jeff Goldstein wing of the Republican party, JD.

    Rage and pettiness above all else is your motto.

    snuffles (677ec2)

  64. I remember as an intern reporter talking to Ted Kennedy’s top man in 1980 at the New Hampshire democrat primary. He said the Republicans had a good chance in the general election as long as they didn’t “fall on their swords and nominate a right-winger like Reagan.” Hah.

    The Left always lauds RINOs before they run because they know they’ll lose. The Left is always terrified of true conservatives because they win. They didn’t viciously attack Palin because she was a harmless dolt. They saw Reagan’s lovely strength in her, and reviled it.

    P.S. McCain lost not only because he was liberal-lite, but because, as a RINO, he couldn’t even name much less grasp the dangers of Obama’s leftism. A man sadly out of touch with his time.

    rrpjr (e98cdc)

  65. Snuffles, was your “entire political ideology soundly rejected by America” in 2004, when Bush won with only two million fewer votes than Obama got, an election in which more people voted than this one? Your candidate won very nearly two thirds as many votes as were cast in the last round of American idol; he won, and although he won by a narrow margin won a geographically diverse range of states and thus (in my own view, as a federalist) a mandate, but don’t oversell it.

    Simon (fb192d)

  66. While its easier to focus on the superfluous stuff like this, its a distraction from the real problems the campaign had (i.e. the GOP at large and what it stands for). Heads should have rolled but its a done deal. Move on and get to work rebuilding because, as it was so succinctly put, there is much to be done,

    Stupid is as stupid does, and if the GOP is anything, it’s the stupid party. Everyone knows it because they prove it so often. What we are seeing here is nothing less than the GOP’s very own version of the Jackass Party’s traditional circular firing squad.

    Dana (3a01f2)

  67. #41:
    I think your comments helped clarify for me the disconnect between the McCain campaign and the moderate voters that he tried, and failed, to reach. His whole campaign was based on (my words) “trust my judgment”. He emphasized his own bipartisanship and willingness to stand against his own party, to the chagrin of conservative voters, and appealed directly to the middle, not the right. He was willing to work with the media, foolishly expecting quid pro quo and apparently unaware that the media was actively working against him.

    In Sarah Palin he found another bipartisan conservative who had a track record of standing up to her own party when it was for the greater good, but unlike McCain she appealed to the conservative base. As I stated above, I think she has the necessary ideals and judgment to be VP: she may not have known everything she needed right off the bat (who does?) but her judgment was good and she could learn as she went. However, her shuttering and the silence of the McCain campaign allowed Democrats and MSM pundits to define her as “unready”, a definition which stuck (like Kerry’s “flip-flop” record). With that in mind, moderates heard McCain’s appeal to “trust my judgment” but saw an “unready” VP pick and couldn’t bring themselves to vote for the seeming contradiction.

    Joel (e54a27)

  68. How can you all be so stupid?

    steve learned how to win friends and influence people at the Liberal School of Manners.

    sniffles – There you go trying to redefine words. SHOCKA.

    JD (008a90)

  69. #68, Dana, heads didn’t roll after the 2006 mid-term elections, if fact the GOP went right back to business as usual and reinstalled virtually the same failed leadership teams in Congress.

    The handwriting was on the wall. These guys don’t change, they have to be dismissed.

    Ropelight (1c7bd1)

  70. A house divided against itself cannot stand, JD.

    Will the Jeff Goldstein wing of the Republican party ever come to terms with the Lincoln wing?

    Don’t know, but I’ve got the popcorn popping.

    snuffles (677ec2)

  71. The people responsible should be rooted out and should never be allowed to work for a campaign again.

    Sorry Patterico, the guy (McCain) who was responsible was rooted out by the 51% of the American people.

    Isn’t it possible that McCain staffers were reacting to a bad decision on The Maverick’s part?

    Oiram (983921)

  72. stevesturm wrote:

    But go ahead, and stick to your (collective) delusion that the only reason GOP candidates lose is because they’re not sufficiently conservative, that McCain would have won if only he had let Sarah be Sarah. How can you all be so stupid? Moderates, by definition, are NOT going to be excited about the same things that true believers are. And if you want their votes, you’re going to have to reach out to them, and picking Palin didn’t do that.

    Uh huh. Tell me, steve, if “moderates” are not “true believers,” exactly what do “moderates” believe in? Don’t chicken out, I wanna know if what you think.

    Obama was smart enough to disguise his radical leanings (with an assist from the MSM) in order to not alienate moderates and he won as a result.

    So, lemme get this straight: To defeat a good-looking, smooth-talking black cryptoradical that 95% of the news media wants to win more than they care about retaining any semblance of professionalism or journalistic standards, McCain should have picked a guy who wouldn’t “alienate moderates.”

    Obviously, an unapologetic Christian who is a true fiscal conservative and government reformer who lives by the pro-life philosophy she espoused is just too sceeeery for “moderates.” So, Mr. Sturm, who fits your description that would have given McCain a chance at victory? Anybody? Anybody? Bueller?

    Look, I’ll give you a moment to think about it. Here’s some hold music. Take your time. You’ll need it.

    L.N. Smithee (0931d2)

  73. Isn’t it possible that McCain staffers were reacting to a bad decision on The Maverick’s part?

    — That’s a little hard to credit since it was not a bad decision.

    Icy Truth (0466e6)

  74. Mike K (51) I sure hope you’re better at your day job than you are in figuring out me and my motivations.

    I’m pretty good at my day job but a moron could figure you out.

    I ‘want to see us lose’? Then why the f**k did I vote for McCain? Why have I voted for a Republican in every Presidential election since I was 18? (Ford in 76, for those who care to count).

    Why ? I don’t know but you do. Maybe you are dumb or hate everything. Maybe you are lying about your vote. We have lots of them around here. I don’t think your advice is worth taking.

    Yeah, I really want Democrats to raise my taxes, interfere with my business and make me and my family less safe.

    Maybe you’re just dumb. You sure throw those insults around. How do they feel as incoming ?

    But go ahead, and stick to your (collective) delusion that the only reason GOP candidates lose is because they’re not sufficiently conservative, that McCain would have won if only he had let Sarah be Sarah. How can you all be so stupid?

    I guess we were just born that way, like you were.

    Moderates, by definition, are NOT going to be excited about the same things that true believers are. And if you want their votes, you’re going to have to reach out to them, and picking Palin didn’t do that. Obama was smart enough to disguise his radical leanings (with an assist from the MSM) in order to not alienate moderates and he won as a result.

    Comment by stevesturm

    I still don’t know what you mean by moderates except abortion. Guess what ? I’m pro-choice and have even done abortions !

    I just think you an angry jerk who likes to throw around insults anonymously. I don’t think you have any idea what moderates want.

    Mike K (531ff4)

  75. Don’t you think that the country is tired of bushes “hokeyness” and what he and his party has done to the USA? Palin is not READY 4 prime time and may never be. Just to “dress her up” did NOT work, the $$ money (given by repub contributors) they are not happy about it either I would imagine, I would not be), but whatever, and the fact that mccains own 13 cars and 8 homes,, just HOW does he FEEL our PAIN? or Palin///LOL there’s a PUN… AMERICA has spoken Mr Obama is the next President, thank GOD he is nothing like the MORON who occupies the Whitehouse now. AMEN

    DENISE (5a88c7)

  76. Hey Denise,

    I saw you panhandling at the intersection of Harlem and North, this morning. I think you’re kind of cute if you’d just clean yourself up a little.

    nk (95bfab)

  77. Dontcha just feel all unitey, nk?

    JD (008a90)

  78. The story about the Palin trashing is coming out. Te source appears to be Nicole Wallace, a McCain press aide. Frum’s comment:

    Nicole & I crossed swords once, during the Harriet Miers nomination battle. Watching what Nicole can do when she is seriously annoyed, I am grateful that I got away from that fight with nothing worse than a few bumps and bruises ….

    and:

    Would it not better serve the cause of understanding for Nicole Wallace to give an on-camera interview to Carl Cameron and state these points in her own voice – and allow viewers to asses their credibility? Wallace’s fingerprints are all over these leaks anyway, so it’s not as if she has any anonymity to lose.

    Come on, Nicole. Let’s hear it without the knife in the back.

    Mike K (531ff4)

  79. I should add, is anyone surprised the back stabber was a woman ?

    Mike K (f89cb3)

  80. The back stabber also tried to pin it on Mitt Romney’s campaign staff. If it does turn out to be Nicole Wallace, it will be up to John McCain to expose his press aide’s duplicity in a very public way, or share her guilt if he put her up to it.

    I’m not surprised the back stabber may turn out to be a woman, I just want to make sure we have a correct ID. Carl Cameron was a fool to put those smears on the air without specific attribution to the source. Doing so was journalistic malpractice.

    My opinion of Cameron took a nose dive when I saw him slime Sarah Palin on national TV. It was the sort of shocking performance you might encounter on Air America, or on MSNBC, not on FOX News.

    Ropelight (1c7bd1)

  81. Sarah Palin got thrown under the bus;
    John’s people said, “It wasn’t us!”
    They hated her duds,
    Drug her name through the mud,
    But come 2013 she’ll be POTUS.

    The Limerick Avenger (556f76)

  82. Come on, everyone knows in their heart of hearts
    that Sarah Palin is an idiot way to stupid to be president. That is why McCain lost.

    Davey (519d6b)

  83. Comment by Davey — 11/6/2008 @ 7:04 pm

    Mmm-hmm. Just like “everyone knows” Reagan was an “affable dunce” and “Bush is an idiot” and “stupid” and Christians are “uneducated and easy to command.” Nice job repeating media memes though.

    Just three questions: (1) have you ever heard Sarah Palin speak in person, either face to face or in a speech? (2) Of the media interviews you’ve seen, how much did they remove from her answers to make her look stupid, as we KNOW they did [read the full transcripts then watch the edited interview] with her answer on “seeing Russia from my house”?

    And….(3) can you think of any reason why some in the media might have a vested interest in making Governor Palin look stupid and Senator “57 states” Obama and Senator “Stand up Chuck” Biden look superintelligent and presidential?

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  84. The “see Russia from my house” was a Tina Fey line that got incorporated into the meme. What she actually said was that she had Russia as Alaska’s closest neighbor except Canada, closer than the lower 48. I’ve been in Anchorage when there were Russian flea markets running every weekend. They come over from Siberia to sell stuff.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  85. Astroturfing, after the fact? A troll writes:

    “…Sarah Palin is an idiot way to stupid to be president….”

    Let’s review:

    1. “to” instead of “too”
    2. “president” instead of “President”

    Troll Identity, confirmed!

    And, of course, this coming from a person who does…what?…for a living?

    Just curious. How is life working the Slurpee Machine?

    Eric Blair (a723e0)

  86. You know sometimes I think people should really think before they decide what is going to come out of their mouths.
    Sarah Palin did the best job in the least amount of time given her and her family. Stop your blaming. Get real. Which one of you out there could have done a better job?
    You know we live in stressful times, but let’s not let it turn us into animals.

    Debra (10aff4)

  87. Thank you for the laugh, Eric Blair! That was perfect!

    Debra (10aff4)

  88. You’re saying what I was thinking, particularly as I watched Cameron’s report on Fox.

    I’m pretty sure Sen. McCain won’t be running for president again. Can we say the same thing about Gov. Palin? Can you say “short-sighted”? How about “non-career enhancing move”?

    I’ve quoted you and [object].

    Consul-At-Arms (e94aa6)

  89. I hope those staffers end up with a job on Obama’s staff. He deserves them. Anyone who would do that is a perfect fit for Obama and his leftist illuminati staff.

    Jeff (024c6a)

  90. Consul-At-Arms,
    Hello!
    Would you be so kind as to explain your answer? “Non career move”?

    Thank you.

    Debra (10aff4)

  91. @Debra,

    That’s “non career enhancing move.”

    I suspect that Gov. Palin’s national prominance, very likely as a future Presidential candidate, has only just begun.

    So campaign staffers getting on the “outs” with her now are likely going to need a change of career or party.

    Let’s hope they didn’t quit their day jobs.

    -CAA

    Consul-At-Arms (e94aa6)

  92. CAA-Thank you!

    It breaks my heart to see so much ignorance and hate are being directed at her through the use of mean-spirited rumors and accusations.

    The sun is shining and it’s a beautiful day here on the east coast.

    Peace!

    Debra (10aff4)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2070 secs.