Sarah Palin cost John McCain 2 million votes in 2008, according to a study

The Washington Post ^ | 1-19-16 | Philip Bump

[Gandalf the Mauve]

There was one race in which Palin appears not to have been much help -- and, in fact, hurt the candidate. According to a 2010 study from researchers at Stanford University, noted by Brendan Nyhan, Palin's presence on the 2008 Republican presidential ticket cost John McCain 1.6 percentage points. In an election in which 131 million people voted, that's 2.1 million votes that McCain should have gotten but didn't....

As the campaign progressed, fewer people said they didn't have an opinion on Palin. And as nearly all of those people formed an opinion on her, that opinion was a negative one. As the researchers put it, "Palin saw a sharp increase in negative evaluations as the fall campaign progressed. Looking at individual-level changes in favorability, we find that 34% of respondents downgraded their evaluations of Palin between September and Election Day, while just 12% became more favorable."...

We're looking at this now in light of Palin's endorsement of Donald Trump, of course, but it's important to set the context properly. We're not suggesting that this study means that Palin will have a deleterious effect on Trump in the primaries. On the contrary, Palin's endorsement likely helps solidify some support for Trump among conservative voters.

Instead, it's worth considering what happened with Palin in light of Trump's candidacy.

The study notes a 2008 Newsweek column which suggested that Palin "sent wavering Democrats, independents and moderate Republicans scurrying to Sen. Barack Obama."...

[TYVets]

I only voted for McCain because of 0bama

[Parley Baer]

If anything Sarah gained McQueeg 2 million votes. Whoever came up with this is full of cr@p.

[kcvl]

Washington Post hires ultra-liberal former union bully and nobody bats an eye

http://images.c-spanvideo.org/Files/066/20131113093018001_hd.jpg

in 2009 Bump worked for the South Bay Labor Council (SBLC), a Silicon Valley-based union group with a penchant for making the political personal. Cindy Chavez, the group’s former chief executive, frequently targeted political opponents and local journalists who dared to stray from her preferred storyline.

Bump, for his part, was SBLC’s political director and administrator of “San Jose Revealed,” a pro-union website which published vitriolic hit pieces against the Council’s perceived enemies. Although the website was run anonymously, San Jose Inside discovered Bump’s connection through an examination of electronic evidence and two sources who alleged the SBLC made payments to him.

Under his direction, “San Jose Revealed” published the personal address — obtained under spurious circumstances — of a frequent target of pro-union groups. This individual’s home was later vandalized, with property destroyed and defiled with swastika graffiti.

Bump also reportedly published a map to the house of a deputy district attorney who prosecuted violent Bay Area gangs for a living, shamed a local business owner’s daughter for an unpaid garbage bill and posted the Match.com dating profile of an opposing local politician.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/22/washington-post-hires-ultra-liberal-former-union-bully-and-nobody-bats-an-eye/#ixzz3xoEwopPR

[MotorCityBuck]

Thanks. I live a mile West of Detroit in the Suburb of Livonia. Im a Buckeye living behind enemy lines so to speak.
Go Trump

[angryoldfatman]

Going with all of the others here who say McCain cost McCain votes.

OK, first, look at the source: The Washington Post. There you go.

Second, to those who actually believe that Palin cost McCain votes, you’re buying the Lefty crap that Sarah was a stupid, uneducated Alaskan redneck in 2008 who wasn’t a REAL woman like Shrillary, Debbie Dimwit, Fauxcahantas, Nancy Palomino, and other baby-butcher-lovers.
The leftists in the MSM and entertainment industries created that propaganda to shame anyone who supported Palin. Alinskyites to the core.

Third, those who paint Palin as a coward have to realize that these same leftists RUINED her, mostly by attacking her family. They destroyed her reputation and made it impossible for her to get gainful employment AND tried to destroy her family (which I admit was made easier by her foolish daughter Bristol), probably accompanied by threats to do even more. For example, remember this guy? - http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/15/books/joe-mcginnisss-the-rogue-on-sarah-palin-review.html?_r=0

Not only that, Palin suffered abuse from her own allies, the very people who asked her to revitalize McCain’s campaign.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jul/28/sarah-palin-mccain-campaign-elitists-banned-me-tel/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tS2cXwFV98

Trump, for all his faults, is no weak-kneed milquetoast McCain.

[kcvl]

Fact Check: The Washington Post’s Philip Bump Has a Credibility Problem

by John Nolte

10 Dec 2015

In the course of just one week, while taking on two of the most controversial issues in our body politic, The Washington Post’s Philip Bump has twice been caught lying. Saturday, in an effort to boost Barack Obama’s call to restrict our Second Amendment civil rights, Bump used mass-shooting stats so phony that even the gun control extremists at the New York Times felt compelled to debunk them.

On Monday, as part of the Washington Post’s never-ending quest to destroy Donald Trump, elect Hillary Clinton, and cover for Barack Obama, Bump went to hysterical lengths to dismiss and downplay poll numbers that tell the disturbing truth about the state of Islam. Let’s start with his lies about guns.

In his headline, and using the terror attack in San Bernardino to boost the case for gun control, Bump told his readers that “[t]he San Bernardino shooting continues a disturbing trend: No week since 2013 without a mass shooting.”

This is such a brazen lie that the same New York Times that published a gun control editorial on its front page this week felt the need to correct it:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/12/10/fact-check-the-washington-posts-philip-bump-has-a-credibility-problem/

[kcvl]

Why Is The Washington Post’s Philip Bump Lying To Readers About Amtrak?

May 13, 2015 By Sean Davis

“Why is funding Amtrak such a struggle?” the headline of a new Washington Post story by Philip Bump blares. “Because Republican districts don’t use it.”

Liberal ideologues and their friends and co-conspirators in the media have decided that yesterday’s tragic Amtrak crash which has killed at least seven people was the fault of Republicans. Why? Because some Republicans think that after 40 years of posting billion-dollar annual losses, it might actually be time for Amtrak to live up to its statutory charter as a for-profit corporation.

That’s the leftist line, anyway:

http://thefederalist.com/2015/05/13/why-is-the-washington-posts-philip-bump-lying-to-readers-about-amtrak/

[kcvl]

‘Where to Begin?’ Reporters Can’t Stand Ted Cruz Calling the Climate Radicals ‘Flat Earthers’

By Tim Graham | March 27, 2015 | 6:22 PM EDT

Post reporter Philip Bump took it upon himself to try and rebut Cruz’s remarks on global warming in an interview with the Texas Tribune point by point, saying “there’s not much Cruz got right here.”

First, Bump made this ludicrous claim: First, Cruz conflates the science of climate change with the politics of climate change. Scientists don’t scream, “You’re a denier.” They point to the scientific evidence that human activity is leading to climate warming — the evidence of which is overwhelming....There is no “evidence that disproves their apocalyptical claims,” because if there were, scientists would abandon the theory.

That’s how science works. Earth to Bump: Starting with “Bill Nye the Science Guy” on down, there are a pile of very political scientists screaming “denier.” (The Post loves to repeat that.) It’s simply incorrect to say scientists aren’t lobbying hard to shut down and discredit “deniers” wherever they seek to speak in the “news” media.

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2015/03/27/philip-bump-rebuts-not-reports#sthash.l3PVT8nV.dpuf

[piroque]

Sara Palin’s a true conservative ,anti big government ,believes in the right of the people to govern themselves not the other way around.

[Albion Wilde]

The reason for the sharp increase in negative opinion was, without a doubt, the intense and treacherous campaign against Palin from within the McCain camp and the piling on by the other GOP-e operatives and the media. Not that they won’t do it again; but hasn’t the contrast with the media’s indulgence of the inept behavior, malapropisms, gaffes and underperformance by Obama and Biden clarified the public’s understanding that those forces are complicit in the vilification of Palin? Remains to be seen.

[Organic Panic]

OH PLEASE. The only reason McCain got as many votes as he did was because of Palin. The only way McCain even made it through the primaries was by bussed in voters in open primary states. Really? McCain had more charisma than Fred Thompson or Herman Cain? McCain was a dull establishment liberal.

[R Rogers]

WaPo was this study commissioned by Hillary or one of your editors—it’d be virtually the same darn thing.

[Blue Collar Christian]

McCain didn’t want to win. He’s buddies with Obama.