Sometimes it seems we have to walk on eggshells here or risk a deluge of contempt and wild assumptions. A bit of thick skin never hurt anybody.

And as for John McCain, Sarah Palin unleashed on the country negates every bit of good he ever did. It's sad really.

Not sexism. Not immaturity. Enough, frankly, of oversensitivity and needless extrapolations.

The term you used was extremely misogynistic.

And you don't seem a bit sorry for that disgusting display. "oversensitivity and needless extrapolations" my ass.

It kept him out of the White House. I think when people saw how inept he was at picking a VP they ran from him. Perhaps some of his would be voters stayed home because of her. Sure she is awful, but that is the point. If he had chosen someone less awful, we might have been on John McCain's second term and I don't think this country would recover from that.

I think that there was no chance he was going to win with or without Governor Quitter. But, she certainly sealed his fate. No she wouldn't have been good for the country if she had gotten in. And we would have seen her lunacy on parade a whole lot more than we have. I am rather entertained by her since she is no real threat anymore. But, for a while her antics horrified me.

And no, he probably would not have won, but his intention was in fact to win and she would be a heartbeat from the presidency. In fact, when he got his VP bounce for a little while they went even in the polls. Objectively, she came rather close to becoming VP of the US. He used rotten judgement and has no credibility.

For him it was a horrible choice. I think he regretted it from about a half hour after he made his choice to infinity. And it sure wasn't a good choice for the nation, thankfully we don't have to live with that choice occupying the White House. She sure stirred up a lot of chit though. Imagine my shock when I read that she wrote "African American's can't be patriotic." So, we came very close to having that racist a heartbeat away as you say. I am just glad this country came to it's collective senses in time to avert that disaster.

McCain could have picked anybody and MCCAIN still would have lost

It belittles President Obama to think Sarah caused McCain to lose.

the one time a VP indeed helped make a race lost that could have been won was in 2004.
John Edwards truly was a major cause of the loss, a very bad pick.

But nobody would have led McCain to winning.
Had he wanted to go to the White House, he should have taken Kerry's offer in 2004 to defeat W.
But he didn't do it.

But Sarah is immaterial to anything.
McCain picked her because he thought Democratic voters would flock thinking
Sarah=Hillary45.

However, that was bad thinking.
NO democratic voter had anything in common with McCain.
Whereas 99% of the Hillary voters had everything in common with President Obama.

Same in 2012 with Mitt.
Made no difference who he picked.
Mitt LOST in a landslide and was fated to lose in a landslide against President Obama

President Obama WON in 2008 and 2012.
The other candidate didn't blow it by anything they did.
President Obama WON IT.
(and Hillary would have won it in 2008 had President Obama not been the one.
The Democratic party had the two best candidates to win.

BTW-Karl Rove and the republicans do do one thing right-
they stock ALL positions in ALL states from bottom up.
So they have a bench of new candidates tto move up the ladder.

Sarah is just a convienient excuse for McCain.
And had Sarah WORKED THE WORK she could have been viable to keep being powerful.
However, like others before her, she wanted the fame and money over the power.
And she achieved a reality show type of fame.
I do hope she saved her money as her 15 minutes have ran out.
I am certainly no fan.
However, she could have been a contender if she did the grunt work and not just the whine.

and W pulled a fast one(not over me though).
He was NOT stupid
He is NOT dumb
He is not honorable
He is NOT a compassionate conservate
and he sure as hell don't want to be at a BBQ with a regular Joe.

but the public believes all those things
because his personna was carefully scripted and kept on.

I always said over the years since W came into being, that it was an act.
And the temporary instant gratification feel good saying he was an idiot, stupid, things like that, was allowing him to get away with it.

He is a two term president.
Stupid did not get him that.
People thinking he was stupid got him that (both lovers and haters).

a winner does what a loser won't.
Bush was seated.
regardless of what one believes to have been the cause of it,
a winner is seated, and controls the power.
(I blame Nader, others blame the later theft in Dec.,but as hillary45 said about something else
what difference does it make, as long as it doesn't happen again.

President Obama is the best at the game of politics, and he did what the people he defeated in the general election did not do-he was seated.
(and Hillary would have in the general, using the same gamebook. But when two people use the same gamebook, only one can prevail, in 2008 it was President Obama.
In 2016 it will be Hillary45.

and McCain is McCain.
people belieiving he was ever different fell for it then, or are feeling it now.
But he is what he is and always was.
(and if it had led to John Kerry being seated in 2004, I was all for the Kerry/Mccain team.
Just like in 2000, Ohio wouldn't have mattered if McCain had brought in enough other states in 2004 to negate Ohio even being necessary.(same as Florida wouldn't have mattered in 2000 at all, had NH been the other way and Gore been over 270 without Florida).

IMHO of course.

And Sarah was smart enough to get to be governor, and also get to be a VP candidate.
Now, losers/non-seaters of elections are not immortal like all Presidents and VPs are.
but Sarah will be remembered for years and years, and she got rich too.
Again, hope she kept her money and not wasted it, because that type of money is not easy to reaquire(like most lottery winners find out).

imho,feel free to disagree.
Stupid was John Edwards and his cult fans.

No one is saying that Palin solely caused McCain to lose, and no one is saying Obama didn't win it on his own merits. Obama would most likely have won regardless of Palin. However, you choose a VP candidate based on experience and credentials. It is THE most important decision a Presidential candidate makes. McCain went with his advisers who chose Palin because they wanted a game changer who could win over women and gin up the base. She was not properly vetted, was grossly unprepared, and a rotten choice. The buck stops with McCain. He CHOSE her. Alaska is a red state and she apparently had some folksy credentials and got in up in that state small in population. Who knows why they elected her governor up there. She is none too bright by any means and only got her media entertainment jobs because she got some notoriety as the VP candidate and because there are some people frankly numb enough to buy into her idiocy. It is like asking how Limbaugh became a millionaire. He saw a numb audience and got in with them. They buy into his bullshit and send him money. Same as any snake oil salesman. Pray on the ignorant. McCain used rotten judgement. Period.

Voters in McCain's state keep voting him in.

Democratic voters think he is on their side.
He never was.
I would have taken his help in 2004 if the nominee had gotten McCain's acceptance for the VP, as I only vote democratic in a presidential election.
Hell, I led the charge against Edwards in spring 2004, but voted for Kerry evenso, knowing what a bad move it was (and of course, I was proved correct.)

Why did the voters of Carolina vote Edwards in as senator?
Why did the voters of Alaska vote Palin in?
Why was anyone voted in?

McCain made bad judgement when he picked Repubilcan as his party and conservative as his lifetime selection.
I would never ever have voted for him for President because of that

Rush Limbaugh was not stupid. He was a DJ who had a dozen jobs and never caught on.
Then he saw an opening.
For all we know, in real life he was a flaming liberal.
It matters little, if he is stupid or smart anyhow.

There is no requirement for smarts to run for office.
If so, Jimmy Carter would have easily won reelection.

Adlai Stevenson was perhaps the 3rd smartest candidate ever.
Ike was not considered to be a brain.
Ike was elected twice.
Adlai is forgotten except by us political junkies that remember him(and in a few years nobody will ever remember him at all.

Winning and being seated is all that matters.

Don't like stupid? Don't waste votes in a presidential on third party candidates
IMHO

Don't like McCain and Sarah? Never vote for them.

I was saying right at election time, let's never mention the two losers of 2012 again, because both are irrelevant.

Sarah is irrelevant as she won't spend the work needed to run for senate/house/gov. where she could be part of the convesation
And she never will be President or VP, therefore she no longer matters
She has no base either to be a factor as a third party.

We do have to worry about 3rd party distractors who can influence an election, like
Nader did in 2000 and perot did in 1992, and just remain vigillant and say never again
let it happen.

btw-look at Reagan.
He was a liberal democratic, who became an ultra conservative in a state of liberal democratics.
He didn't change to win and remain a liberal democratic person at heart, he
actually became an ultra conservative.

Look at Mike Dukakis. He is one of the smartest people around. Yet he gotcha'd his way into now being a catchphrase "Dukakissed" that people who get gotcha'd fall into.

and Bush41 was smart enough to be the defacto power of the US since he got the power
(was that bum him? way back then.)

President Obama is smart. Smart in 2013 is playing the game 10 steps ahead to see everywhere what is and will be happening, and also what happened in the past.
That is what matters.

The entire republican party can be said to be stupid. Because they keep doing the same stupid thing over and over again because of their very reason for being republicans in the first place. They are the tail chasing the dog chasing the tail.
But dogs that are pets are smart enough to know who feeds them.

Politicians who are smart are smart enough to get the votes and be seated of the majority of the electoral college and also the public. But getting the 270 is smart.

John McCain never had a shot at 270.
He could have picked the head of MENSA and he still would have lost.
McCain himself could have been the head of MENSA and he still would have lost.
Because what he stood for was opposite what President Obama stood for.
And that is why John McCain lost. Way before his vp pick, he lost.

BTW, leave Nader out of 2000 for a moment.
Gore is considered very smart, right.
Yet he was as boneheaded as McCain in his righteousness to not allow Bill Clinton to campaign with him.
Who was smarter in 2000? Gore or Bush?
Bush got seated. Being smarter mattered little as a winner does what a loser won't.
That is be seated.

44 Presidents and 43 people smart enough to be seated.(one is counted twice)

and maybe 50 more were VPs who never became President.

However, there were hundreds of neverwons, who were not smart enough to be seated.

It don't matter how you get there, it matters to get there.

And stupid or smart is no requirement. Both can be a help or a hindrance.

McCain may have no judgement, however, he has power. Voting him out of office would be a wonderful thing.
If it took our own Sarah Palin of his state who is a democratic candidate, well, I would support that person if that person (male or female) had the ability to win.(i.e. be seated.)
(but not a John Edwards type).

Hell, maybe instead of Hagel, President Obama should have nominated McCain for the job.
Get McCain out of the senate. Not such a bad idea.
Would McCain veto McCain?

theoretically speaking of course.

feel free to disagree.

It is NOT excusable.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1240214306#post39

No, thank you.

I will alert on you every time.

Why not just stand up against both wrongs? Lots of folks do that here.

then you double down and give us a "fuck you".

misogynist. that simple.

you purposely chose words to offend. you offended. and now you insult the people you further insult the people you offended. classic misogyny. like using the n word and telling blacks they are hypersensitive. racist.

Overgeneralizations. Ridiculous extrapolations and assumptions.

If the McCain/Palin candidacy was the cause and impetus for the downward spiral of the GOP.

OR

If the McCain/Palin candidacy was a symptom of an already downward spiraling GOP.

I mean, the whole idiot/stupid/rabid/extremist/zealous crappola could certainly be placed squarely on the shoulders of the Tea Party, but when was it they took a foothold on the party?

history has shown it. An embarrassment Magoo.

the majority at DU.
Other people do it or did it is the kind of excuse five year olds give. You want a place with no standards? Great, go find one. This isn't it. Save your "labia flapping" metaphor for the Yahoo boards or Reddit. It does not belong here.