The Blog of Record

“High Risk, High Reward”: The Sarah Palin VP selection story.

The McCain campaign did vet Palin well. The vetters simply couldn’t predict that the media, smelling danger for their candidate, would tear her apart in an unprecedented campaign of pure, undisguised hate. But you won’t read that in the Washington Post, of course.

The campaign’s real problem with Palin was that her ”handlers” didn’t have half an idea what to do with the gem they suddenly found in their hands. I think they were scared of her.

He didn’t want to “be in the front chair attacking this historic candidacy”.

More Meghan McCain and Mark McKinnon videos here.

The real John McCain is back, doing what he does best.

A joke made its way around the Capitol yesterday: How do you know the 2008 election is really over? Because John McCain is causing trouble for Republicans again.

He believes the maverick is ready to go bipartisan again – this time for Obama, to help him break Republican filibusters and generally “produce the kind of post-partisan harmony that Obama promised and the public now expects”.

Remember, it was this onetime prisoner of war who led the charge to open diplomatic relations with Vietnam. If that past is prologue, and McCain’s legislative record is any guide, he will not just join with Obama but lead the charge in Congress on global warming, immigration “reform,” the closing of Guantanamo, federal funding for embryonic-stem-cell research, and importation of prescription drugs.

Maybe the best man did win, after all:

Sen. John McCain said Sunday he would not necessarily support his former running mate if she chose to run for president.

Speaking to ABC’s “This Week,” McCain was asked whether Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin could count on his support.

“I can’t say something like that. We’ve got some great other young governors. I think you’re going to see the governors assume a greater leadership role in our Republican Party,” he said.

He then mentioned governors Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota and Jon Huntsman of Utah.

No wonder Joe the Plumber was not impressed by the Maverick when he got to know him better.

“I think my job is, of course, to be a part of, and hopefully exert some leadership, in the loyal opposition. But I emphasize the word loyal,” McCain said.

Hey, maybe that’s what Palin should do if she (for whatever reason) wants McCain’s invaluable support – switch to the party to which he has no problem being loyal.

With an attitude like that, no wonder McCain lost:

In a surprising rebuke to the warriors who fought for him through tough times, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on Sunday sided with President-elect Barack Obama and scolded the Republican National Committee for fanning the Illinois corruption scandal. 

Here is what Joe the Plumber had to say about John McCain in an interview to Glenn Beck: “the Republicans didn’t put out a candidate for us to really vote for. It’s the lesser of two evils.”

Doesn’t sound like praise for McCain? It will when you read more:

I asked him pretty direct questions and some of the answers you guys are going to receive, you know, they appalled me, absolutely. You know, I was angry. In fact, I wanted to get off the [McCain campaign] bus after I talked to him.

Joe kept campaigning for McCain, but only because the thought of Barack Obama becoming president scared him even more.

His opinion of Sarah Palin is starkly different:

Sarah Palin’s absolutely the real deal. You know, I only got to spend a short amount of time with her but, you know, it was been asked if I felt any presence when I was with John McCain or Barack Obama. You know, with Sarah Palin, I don’t want to say I felt a presence but she definitely had energy and she definitely went to work for American people, and it disgusts me on how often they try to bash her just for her sincerity. It’s just, you know, she really wants to work for America and I mean, I wish people would listen to her and let them, and let her work for us. You know, she wants to serve us. She’s not looking for power.

Did the Republicans have their ticket upside down? That’s the question I’d like to hear Joe the Plumber answer.

Daniel Crandall proposes a riddle:

On November 3rd the McCain campaign made a last minute appeal for the women’s vote. How did he do this? According [to] James (don’t call him Jim) Lileks, at Screedblog, the McCain campaign sent out a postcard to potential voters in swing states.

The postcard included the following text:

“As the father of three daughters, I owe _________ a debt for inspiring them and millions of other women to believe nothing in this great country is beyond their reach. . . I share _________’s goal of promoting women to more important roles throughout our government. By the end of my first term, I promise you will see a dramatic increase in the presence of women in every part of the government. You have my word on it. John McCain.”

Here is Senator McCain fondly gazing at the person whose name has been excised from the text above.

The not-so-surprising answer is here.

Daniel’s post continues his earlier conclusion that Republicans should be glad McCain lost.

This seems to be the lesson of John McCain’s loss in the 2008 presidential election. If you neglect your base, people won’t bother to get out on election day just to vote against your opponent. You have to give them a reason to vote for you. When the sentiment among your base is “Well, I guess I’ll have to hold my nose and vote for our guy because the alternative is even worse”, you might as well start writing your concession speech.

Some of the opinions are interesting and even funny, such as Daniel Handler’s:

Obama’s list says that he’d like to convey a willingness to face heartbreak and irony, that he’s open to the new and to the experimental, but that he’s serious of purpose and true of heart.

McCain’s list says that sure, he reads books, but he’s not a pansy boy.

Most of them, though, are just what you’d expect from a bunch of Bay Area intellectuals: Obama a profound thinker, McCain an old warmonger, American empire, Bush’s oedipal complex killed thousands of people, etc., etc.

And subtle things like this (emphasis added):

Sen. McCain’s list is designed to make us think he’s a deep reader and historical thinker with a taste for good writing.

Senator Obama’s list is designed to help us see that he is a man of feeling, imagination and breadth, and that his reading is not limited to books that will improve his politics (except maybe for the Emerson).

 (Via Bookslut.)

John Podhoretz indulges in the classic “numbered post” goodness.

Via Real Clear Politics.

“The McCain campaign is unusually upbeat. Does it have reason to be?” asks Slate’s chief political correspondent.

As if fearing that it may, he tries hard to convince us that McCain has nothing to be upbeat about, and it all is either “deceit (aides know they’re losing badly and they’re play-acting)” or “Drudge-like self-delusion (they’re mindlessly clutching at, and believing in, any glimmer of positive news)”. The third option – “truth (there actually are real signs of hope)” - is discarded, because “when it’s in your interest for things to look positive, you tend to see them positively”.

And since it’s all doom and gloom for McCain,

[h]ow do McCain aides get around this dire picture without the aid of strong drink? Let’s just say that McCain’s campaign now relies on hope more than Obama’s does.

Hey Slate – if Obama is sure to win anyway, why are you trying so hard to persuade McCain supporters to stay home on the big day? Can it be that there’s still a chance for the old soldier if he just keeps fighting to the end?

And isn’t voter suppression supposed to be a Republican tactic?

One man did much to bring about the crisis – and now the crisis is making him president.

The other man fought it when it could still be averted – and now it is killing his chances.