You can claim that the independents were not going for McCain all you want, but the fact remains that the Sarah Palin pick SOLIDIFIED the fact he would lose those independents.
Well...I will claim that because I can look at the polls. Though admittedly I had remembered poorly in terms of Obama having a lead. In reality, the polls were relatively similar for them with independents throughout. From June through August (just prior to the Palin Pick) the two of them kept swapping back and forth over who was leading, with the gap being larger than 5% only once (a 7% lead for Obama)
SOURCE. By the end of the election? Obama had a 2% lead in the independent vote
Source. So before Palin they were constantly within a few points from each other and at the end.....they were a few points from each other. The storyline that Palin was some huge drag on independents is a myth created by liberals that doesn't bear fruit in reality. The independents she turned off were the individuals who largely were going to swing to Obama's side anyways where as, on the flip side she helped him increase in the republican support. Notice form those same links...prior to Palin he was pulling in about 84% of the Republican vote and 68% of the conservative. Post Palin? 93% and 77% respectively.
If you want to talk "moderates" rather than independents then you have something. Pre-Palin Obama 51% and McCain 35%. Post-Palin? 63% to 37%. The numbers in moderates went up for Obama, but they also increased in measurement similar to the increased bump he got in his base. Note, McCain ALSO bumped up in Moderates by the end as well, just not as much.
When talking independents, the Palin pick didn't hurt. You could make an argument it hurt him in terms of the moderate vote but its highly questionable if the hurt it did him there outweights the good it did him in other sectoins. That also of course simply assumes that those moderates that went from undecided to Obama did so due to Palin.
I knew many of independents that were on the fence before the Sarah Palin pick, but afterwords when she started giving speaches and debates, they quickly went over to the Obama side.
Thank you for anecdotal evidence. I knew many that went the other way.
Sarah Palin sunk it for McCain. You cannot win an election by concentrating on solidifying your base while ignoring independents.
You can't win an electoin by ignoring independents and FAILING to solidfy your base either, which is what McCain was doing.
It's why I lay the blame for the McCain failure on McCain, not Palin. McCain was NEVER going to significantly win over the conservative and republican base in 08. He spat in their eye far to many times for it to be convincing. He at least had some credentials to pitch to independents. Picking Palin would've given him a chance to push himself publicly in his speech towards the middle and attempt to woo Independents while Palin is working in the background solidfying the base that he couldn't get on his own. Instead...he pushed her to the forefront and then tried to out right-wing his right-wing selection which still didn't endear him to his base but I believe helped cement the distrust independents and moderates had begun to form of him prior to his selection.
Had he selected a "moderate" or especially a moderate liberal, such as Lieberman, I fully believe he would've been doomed. Your base are you big campaign donators and they would've became even MORE disenchanted, hurting him financially. You need the base to spread the word of mouth and a pick like that would not have done it. It would CONTINUE to disenchant the base with him, slagging turnout and support, all in hopes of capturing a moderate and independent group that had a large portion significantly enamored with Barack Obama.
The issue was not the selection of Palin...the issue was the horrible handling of the selection and the horrible campaign strategy after that selectoin.
eace