Amarillo College Ranger

Issue date: 11/13/08 Section: Notions

Media Credit: www.johnmccain.com Gov. Sarah Palin and Sen. John McCain were arguably the best team possible for the Republican nod, but still fell short in the election. Some blame Palin for the defeat.

It's time for the post election round up where the media and those who study election data put in their final words on everything from why the person who won did, to why another candidate's speech was a total nightmare that cost him the election.

This general hubbub this year is that President-Elect Barack Obama ran a perfect election campaign while Senator John McCain was, to put it mildly, fool-hearty in number of issues.

While it remains debatable if Mr. Obama ran a "perfect" campaign, the one he ran got him elected. So what then cost McCain the election? Perhaps the most talked about "blunder" of his run was the historic pick of Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin as his Vice Presidential running mate.

Why is this considered a blunder? She is a strong and highly approved governor in her state.

When she was added to the ticket in August almost across the board McCain picked up at least two percentage points according to usaelectionpolls.com and in some states it was as dramatic as ten points.

McCain was also dropping decisively in the polls in several states until the announcement. According to Fox News and the McCain camp from the moment she was picked until September 15th McCain surged to the lead in both national polls and on the electoral map.

Sept 15, as some may remember, was the day Lehman Brothers filed bankruptcy and until that day McCain was saying that the fundamentals of the economy were strong. How do those poll numbers and a bad idea of the position of the country's economy equal Palin hurt not helped McCain?

A number of McCain's aides, who refuse to be identified, have bashed Palin saying that she didn't know what countries are involved in NAFTA and that she didn't know Africa was a continent not a country.

Beyond the basic thought that these accusations are childish, they don't seem to be that credible because no one will say these things on the record, nor do they seem that plausible.

Palin would certainly have had to know that Canada, at least, was a member of NAFTA because it's the only land Alaska is attached to. As the governor of Alaska she certainly would have to deal with Canada on matters of trade with her state. Palin has also commented on the Africa statement, saying that her question was taken out of context. This argument makes sense. Africa is a big place and is full of social and security issues for the U.S. and the world. Anyone would want a few clarifications about it before a national debate.

Continued...

Page 1 of 2 next >

Article Tools