Friday, November 29, 2013

Another Leftist Myth About Palin Destroyed-The Most Important One:"Palin Effect” finds (Palin) helped McCain by attracting more voters to the ticket,"

UPDATE:Here is the link to the full journal paper; LINK
h/t C4P. report/study does seem to suggest that McCain won certain independent/moderate voters that had developed strongly favorable impressions of the Governor and that these independent/moderate voters may not have voted for McCain without Palin on the ticket."
***************************************************

No news to me, and any person who took even a moment to check the actual facts, of course that Governor Palin helped, not hindered John McCain's 2008 presidential campaign. The leftist myth has been that "Sarah Palin caused McCain to lose the 2008 election" whereas the truth was reported within days of the elections end.

The sharp jump in McCain's poll rating after Governor Palin was added to the ticket, the mass crowds which accompanied her, not him and the continuing statements over the last five years of  "I voted for Palin not McCain should have made it obvious what the "Palin effect" actually was."

Beyond anecdotal testimony and personal  evaluation of crowd size etc, the exit polling and analysis too date
gave a true indication of Governor Palin's performance. I detail that data at the end of the following post.
Now a new technical analysis in a political science journal expands on the data as reported in  The Washington Examiner below. LINK

Apart from laying the leftist myth to rest the commentary makes the further conclusion that given Governor Palin's exceptional performance in 2008 the base has been put in place for a 2016 run. This is a perfectly logical and valid conclusion and I add the electoral College map which sets out a more than possible voting structure for a Palin victory.



Report: You betcha Sarah Palin helped John McCain in 2008, has 2016 support base

BY PAUL BEDARD | NOVEMBER 29, 2013 AT 8:47 AM 




It's been debated for five years, and the conventional wisdom has generally concluded that Sarah Palin, the 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee, hurt Sen. John McCain's chances to beat then-Sen. Barack Obama for the presidency with her outsized and controversial personality.
But now a comprehensive new analysis of the so-called “Palin Effect” finds that in the final analysis, the former Alaska governor helped McCain by attracting more voters to the ticket, crushing a mainstream media view.
What’s more, while she attracted wider press attention than most prior veep candidates, her actual impact for a No. 2 was about average.
“Palin had a positive effect on McCain,” according to the new Palin analysis in the authoritative Political Research Quarterly.

Both findings could provide a basis for a 2016 run for the presidency by the Tea Party favorite.Digesting mountains of data, two political science professors from Bradley University in Peoria, Ill., said their findings showed that the conventional wisdom that independent voters ran from the McCain-Palin ticket was wrong. They found that independent voters had the same reaction to Palin as Republicans, who largely liked her.
“Palin did not have a negative effect on McCain's voter share overall, nor did she result in eroded support for McCain among critical swing voters such as independents and moderates,” the duo wrote.
Their analysis picked apart a recent report that Palin drove off voters and was uniquely divisive, claiming it was flawed.
Instead, it found that Palin “did not have a unique or unprecedented influence on the race; at best, she had precisely the same small effect on vote choice in 2008 that we would expect of any running mate.”
************************************************************************************************************************

Putting To Rest The Big Leftist Lie; "Palin Caused McCain's Loss"; Indisputable Evidence To The Contrary




The left continues with their big lie that Palin cost McCain the 2008 election. This is often seen in comments from so called "Republicans" along the lines of "I was going to vote for McCain but when he chose Palin I switched to Obama" and similar such nonsense. 

Here are are the unbiased, unvarnished facts (with links to the full reports in red) from respected professional polling firms.The major issue was the economy, the Lehman brother's collapse and McCain "suspending" his campaign. 

Palin's addition to the ticket was a significant plus factor which  kept McCain as close as he did until nothing could save him as the economy tanked and the bail-out inflamed passions.

It has been a disgusting spectacle watching the McCain team, through the mechanism of the Hollywood left's hatchet jog "Game Change' put the blame for their incompetence on Palin-the facts prove otherwise.
****************************************************************************


PEW RESEARCH CENTER FOR THE PEOPLE & THE PRESS November 5, 2008

Yet those who cited Palin's selection as a factor in their vote -- 60% of all voters -- favored McCain by 56% to 43%.
******************************************************************************
After the election, on Nov. 7, 2008, an article published by Rasmussen


Rasmussen Reports
Friday, November 07, 2008
Sixty-nine percent (69%) of Republican voters say Alaska Governor Sarah Palin helped John McCain’s bid for the presidency, even as news reports surface that some McCain staffers think she was a liability.

********************************************************************************

Gallup Daily: Election 2008

Despite the premise of “Game Change” – that Sarah Palin cost John McCain the 2008 presidential election – Gallup polls prove HBO’s assertion categorically false. Palin wasn’t the reason the Republicans lost the election. She’s the only reason they had a fighting chance up until the time McCain suspended his presidential campaign in late September.

Gallup polls from the last presidential race prove that once Palin joined the ticket on Aug. 29, 2008, McCain’s ratings steadily climbed to a point where the Republican ticket even outshined Democratic Sen. Barack Obama.
In the two weeks before Palin joined the McCain ticket, the Arizona senator drifted in the low 40 percentile range, mostly around 41, 42 and 43 percent, while Obama held as much as an 8 point lead at about 49 and 50 percent. Four days after Palin joined the ticket, however, McCain’s numbers climbed to 45 percent and Obama’s sank to 47 percent, narrowing the gap significantly from eight points to two.
Between Sept. 4-6, McCain and Palin actually overshot the Obama ticket by 3 percent with the Republicans in the lead at 48 percent and the Democrats at only 45. McCain consistently held that lead until Sept. 15, and then the candidates balanced out with Obama enjoying a mere three-point lead, and no lead at all from Sept. 22-24, when the numbers were tied at 46 percent.
[...]
Some were intrigued as to how McCain’s decision would play out in the polls, but once he suspended his campaign in late September he never recaptured the lead he enjoyed with the breaking news of recruiting Palin.
It was downhill from there.
McCain’s campaign was taken out of suspension, but it never actually got back off the ground. From then, the gap between McCain and Obama only widened, leaving the Republicans at a severe disadvantage. McCain’s numbers remained steady around 42 and 43 percent throughout October, but Obama’s continued climbing, and by October 31, McCain’s standing had dropped to 40 percent and Obama’s had reached 53 percent - a devastating 13-percent gap.


 (Gallup article from SPIB-Dr. Fay)
****************************************************************************************************************************UPDATE:  Sarah Palin's gave revelations on Greta Van Susteren's program LINK that she was muzzled about then candidate Obama's connections to Ayers/Wright during the 2008 campaign. In the light of those comments I think it fair to amend my original question below "Would McCain/Palin have won without the economic collapse? " Now it should be "absolutely, if the McCain team had allowed Palin the freedom to say what she wanted too and to campaign in Michigan as she requested"


The outstanding election site Electoral-Vote.Com commenced a running commentary and analysis during election year 2008 which is available archived AT THIS LINK. It is instructive, looking ahead to a possible Palin run in 2016 to review the McCain/Palin teams performance. It is impossible to recapture the excitement of a presidential campaign five years later but some of the emotion can be discerned in "The Votemaster's" writing

He is one of the most dispassionate, balanced commentator around, and, although writing from the left I respect his intellectual approach to his subject which is lacking in the usual partisan hyperbole so often found on political blogs.

But even given this generally dispassionate approach the puzzlement, and then fear on the left about Palin and her effect on the seemingly inexorable Obama steamroller up till then, comes through in  my opinion. But that adds to the dry images and figures, and brings the campaign back to life including the frenzied, unprecedented, attacks on Palin and her family by the leftist media.

This first map shows the Electoral College numbers September 5th. and shows the state of the race after the Democratic convention with Obama having received a major "bump"and in a massive lead after his acceptance speech August 28th . Obama was ahead with enough votes to be elected (270 the minimum) based on state by state aggregate polling (the same method that Nate Silver at 538.Com used to such effect.) 


On August 29th, John McCain surprised and amazed the political world by announcing Sarah Palin as his VP running mate
"The Votemasters" comments post the GOP convention reflects the almost universal analysis of Palin's address;
"There is no doubt Palin is an enormous hit with the Republican base. She electrified the crowd, no two ways about it. They just loved her. Any doubts they may have had about her are gone."  

Palin had given her speech and the next polling was to show an amazing turnaround. McCain/Palin gained 43 Electoral College votes and Obama lost 30




Here is the McCain/Palin team at their highest point-Obama having lost 55 Electoral college votes since September 4th whilst McCain/Palin gained 47. There is no doubt the race would have fluctuated up and down till election day, but barring unforeseen circumstances victory was more than possible. With Pennsylvania given to Obama the McCain/Palin team would have been elected 274 to 264 if this map had held in November.


On September 16 the end of the race came effectively. McCain's "Campaign suspension" with no solution to the economic collapse, and his back-down on missing the next debate, finished any hope the GOP had because of Palin's monumental efforts. As the next chart shows, once the aggregate polling had caught up with the time delay, Obama moved in front and stayed there right till election day. 

"Hello Economy, Goodbye Cosmetics on Animals

Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch no longer exist, A.I.G. is being radically restructured, and the Dow dropped 500 points yesterday. Guess what? The economy is back."


Would McCain/Palin have won without the economic collapse? With so much inherited from the Bush administration against them it would have been a mighty challenge. However, with the public unsure about the inexperienced Obama and the conservative base hugely energized by Palin on the ticket, there was a chance of victory as the September 18th map showed.

The GOP Establishment and  Democrat's fearful of a Palin run in 2012 tried to pin the blame for the loss on her. Post election analysis shows LINK that this was clearly not the case, and that Palin, as was obvious, added immeasurably to McCain's recovery and chance of victory. Nothing she could do after the crash could salvage the McCain campaign. For Palin to have brought McCain to a tie in Pennsylvania is a little recognized but phenomenal achievement.

With the same support from the Republican base, and with her being freed from McCain's advisers and their ilk, this 2016 electoral map projection shows LINK she has the chance that was there in 2008 before the crash.

With thanks to The Votemaster for permission to reproduce his maps and comments.
**********************************************

Newt Gingrich basically has written off the GOP's 2016 chances if Hillary Clinton is the nominee for all these reasons 

" Hillary Clinton regularly brushes off the idea of a 2016 presidential bid. But if she were to run, at least one prominent Republican thinks his party would be completely outmatched.
"The Republican party is incapable of competing at that level," Gingrich said 
"First of all, she's very formidable as a person," he said. "She's a very competent person. She's married to the most popular Democrat in the country; they both think [it] would be good for her to be president. It makes it virtually impossible to stop her for the nomination."
In addition to having Bill Clinton's support, Hillary Clinton would also have the backing of President Barack Obama, who will still be a "relatively popular president," Gingrich added. "Trying to win that will be truly the Super Bowl." (read the rest at the LINK).
Since Gingrich made that remark last December the political atmosphere has changed in the respect of President Obama being "relatively popular" with RCP having him down to 41% approval today. It may well be that, as with a number of presidents in the last 6 months of their term, President Obama is very unpopular in 2016. 

This is a major concern of Hillary supporters who see Obama as, for the second time, the destroyer of her presidential hopes as can be seen in this article; "Suddenly Hillary is not odds on the be elected president in 2016" LINK.

On a political level the memory of Hillary Clinton's support for President Bush's invasion of Iraq rankles still with some on the left and, if say Condolleezza Rice were on the GOP ticket then Rice, who might otherwise be vulnerable to the Iraq connection could not be attacked by Clinton LINK.

If in 2016 the economy has not recovered and is in fact in a parlous situation then history shows, as with John McCain in 2008 it doesn't matter who the candidate for the party holding the presidency is, no matter how prominent and capable, or who the challenger is, no matter how unknown or judged incapable, there will be a landslide to the challenger. In that situation then Hillary would lose.

But if the economy is in a recovery situation and President Obama is "relatively  popular" is Hillary Clinton guaranteed of victory-the Electoral College map says otherwise. In effect nothing has changed from the Romney campaign of 2012. The Republican candidate needs to win Florida/Virginia/Ohio. If any one of those three is lost then Republican supporters can turn off their televisions and go get whatever drink best drowns their sorrows.

Those three states were won by President Obama by easily overturned margins so this is a more than reasonable scenario: Florida won by 0.86%  Ohio 2.98%  Virginia 3.88%

If those three are won the game is still not in the bag but it looks promising. Any one of Iowa/Colorado/Nevada would do to provide the winning Electoral College margin as indicated in the map above. In my opinion Iowa (5.81%) would be the best chance for the GOP presuming the candidate is a conservative.

All things being equal i.e. an unpopular second term for President Obama and the economy still not in full recovery and the normal turn of the historic electoral wheel the GOP has every chance of victory even if Hillary is the nominee. If she is not the nominee then even New Hampshire, or New Mexico if Governor Martinez is on the ticket is in play as well.


Fair use notice: This website contains copyrighted material, the use of which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Excerpts of such material is made available for educational purposes, and as such this constitutes ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Act. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this website is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Original material published on this website may be excerpted and the excerpt reproduced for the purpose of critical reviews. However, such original material may not be reproduced in full on another website or in any manner without prior approval from this website’s owner. In all cases when material from this website is reproduced in full or in part, the author and website must be credited by name and a hyperlink provided to this website.