VaYank5150
Gold Member
I disagree.
President Obama won by 6 points. He campaigned against a lame duck with pitiful approval ratings. He had a large majority of the young vote due to his charisma and hipness. He had a campaign team that is matched by few, if any, in history and he had the advantage of the minority vote that the democratic party always had; but his running increased the numbers that actually voted; dramatically.
And, we can not forget the promise to 95% of the Americans that they would get extra spending money during a recession if they elected him.
Yet, he only won by 6%. Seems to me, Palin was a good choice. The spread should have been much larger.
In my opinion, of course.
You and I can agree to disagree on this point. However, in order to test your theory, I believe it is tantamount that you and the GOP (sorry, I am making an assumption here that you are a Republican), put her on the ticket in 2012 WITHOUT McCain. Would you agree?
She was a needed spark for a failing campaign.
Her allure came and went.
Now she is a good looking commentator with a political background; but no longer a politician.
And I am not a republican. I am a conservative. Bush did not have my vote in 2004.
McCain was the recipient of my NO vote for President Obama.
And I like to agree to disagree. It makes me smarter and wiser. So I thank you for a civil debate.
Fair enough, and thank you for the clarification on the Republican remark. If not Palin, who? If not now, when?