Who will prove to have been the bigger liability, Sarah Palin or Sarah . . . er Paul Ryan?

[Stinky The Clown]

I'm actually thinking Ryan because he is actually seen as substantial but is already clearly being shown as a pathological liar. The Snow Nothing was just sad and a comic relief next to a dottering old man. Ryan is just showing what a slimebucket he is.

Anyway, wudda you think?

[sadbear]

1. Gotta go with Sarah

I think McCain had a better shot of winning without her. I don't it really mattered who Mitt picked.

[Vincardog]

2. They are both attempts to "excite" the base. The problem is that the base is an over-excited

minority of reactionary sheep. Lyin Ryan will prove to be the bigger liability.

[NRaleighLiberal]

3. I think Palin dragged McCain down...RMoney and Ayn get to share the prize for baggage, to my mind.

[HopeHoops]

4. Six of one, half-dozen of the other - lets leave it up to Sarah and Paul to fight over which is more

[rock]

5. Sarah was just a joke

And so counted for nothing. I.e. McCain with her was the same as without her - no diff.

Ryan is an extreme negative. If Rmoney had been going to win before this pick, he won't now. (Actually I believe he was going to lose before and after, it's just that now it's certain.)

[hifiguy]

6. Palin, but it's close.

Ryan will fool a few people into thinking he's a "serious" policy wonk.

Princess Dumbass was nothing but what in vaudeville was called a "glamour stooge."