Palin's role was obvious, you always need a balanced ticket. But to do it at the expense of more important moderates is inexcusable. The three reasons I talked about previously are very reasonable explanations of how she helped the Reps to burn up. Obviously there are more important reasons but she's in there.

-------
Massive, epic adventure, multi-coloured, multi-layered.
Sort of two/three dimensional Wizard of Oz for the future.

---

The phrase "political liability" was often used after her first few high profile interviews after her nomination. Her polls slumped and she lost out to Biden.

Palin's role was obvious, you always need a balanced ticket. But to do it at the expense of more important moderates is inexcusable. The three reasons I talked about previously are very reasonable explanations of how she helped the Reps to burn up. Obviously there are more important reasons but she's in there.

---

Yes of course it was used, the media reported Obama favorably over 5 to one against McCain.  Its well known that the media did not even attempt to hide the bias of reporters and editors which 80% of self identify as liberal.

She may of well have been a political liability in the eyes of people who were not going to vote for McCain anyway.  She did however sweep a large number of the base back into McCain's camp.  

In a campaign you really don't make decisions about what people who already are not going to vote for you will think.  The moderates were polling over 70% to Obama and aside from one slump after Palin was announced the rate was on a steady rise.  The moderates were lost but with a 50% expected turnout of the base there was no way to even compete without securing the base.  The move was entirely political and entirely politically correct.

Palin was probably the best in a long line of absolutely horrible choices for the reasons Elm laid out.