KEY POINTS:
It seems a long time ago now from when pundits and political strategists were debating how damaging the extended primary contest could be to the Democrats.
But clearly, in hindsight, it helped make Barack Obama a more formidable opponent for John McCain.
The question that arises now is what was McCain doing in that three-month period between wrapping up his nomination and waiting for the Democratic nominee to emerge from the bloodletting?
Surely that was the right time to work out his messages and his strategy, including who his running mate would be and how that person would fit into his strategy.
And yet, he chose Sarah Palin in a last-minute rush in August, after only meeting her twice. With her selection, out went McCain's argument that he had the experience and judgment to lead.
After the Republican primary season, McCain faced significant hurdles - he was lumped with an unpopular party and President in a difficult economic environment - but he also had plenty of reasons to be positive.
He was facing either an inexperienced African American man or a polarising woman. In polls, he consistently did better than a generic Republican against a Democrat. He had a huge advantage in the important questions of who would be the better commander in chief and who would keep America safe.
Although Obama's call for change trumped Clinton's argument of experience, McCain was ideally placed to provide both, had he been able to present an overall vision of the direction he wanted to take the country.
Maybe people wanted change but not a radical departure. He had years of bipartisan achievements and moderate Republicanism to build on.
Early on he should have built on his popularity with independents to pledge to work, in a single presidential term, for the middle class - harnessing the best brains from all sides under his stewardship and unshackled from party bickering. He should have demonstrated his intentions by - early on - picking a credible running mate with economic expertise.
Instead, McCain never gave the public a clear sense of an acceptable, positive, realistic new beginning. He never outlined where he would take America. He pandered to his party instead of insisting that it follow him if it wanted to hold on to power.
Deciding to push through President Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy when he had previously been against them was shuffling across a line in the sand. His small-c conservatism hardened on social issues.
McCain's biggest mistake was his selection and handling of Palin as his running mate. McCain simply failed to choose a running mate who - in the eyes of many commentators and, polls show, many voters - could serve credibly as a president if required, thus raising valid questions about his own judgment.
Palin has been a constant drain on the ticket. A New York Times/CBS poll last month put her favourability rating at 30 - dwarfed by an unfavourability rating of 41, up 12 points in a month. The New York Times said it was the highest negative rating for a vice-presidential candidate the poll had ever measured. In contrast Joe Biden's favourable rating was 50 and his unfavourability rating 36.
A Washington Post/ABC poll showed 52 per cent of voters said McCain's selection of her made them doubt the type of decisions he would make as president. Most voters (58 per cent) believed she lacked the experience to be president.
However, those numbers slipped from when Palin was first introduced to the public. While she lacked the experience and knowledge for such a demanding role, she also showed some prized political attributes - charisma, directness and an ability to connect.
Of course, Tina Fey's impersonation on Saturday Night Live was devastatingly accurate. She has lampooned Palin's determined, post-populist, folksy say-nothingness and her way of starting her sentences as though she's in the midst of them and talking backwards. Her final great gaffe, believing a Canadian comedian was French President Nicolas Sarkozy, was a spectacular own goal.
Did the McCain campaign handle Palin badly, dealing with her as though she were an incompetent junior assistant who might break something at any moment? Or was she too arrogant and power hungry to know her own limitations? When asked whether she hesitated when asked to take the job she said "you don't blink" in that situation.
The campaign tried to squeeze her story as Alaska Governor into a cartoonish shape that suited the campaign narrative, with disastrous results. Instead of just easing her naturally into regular media contact in a way that showed confidence in her, they built up suspense for a series of interviews, in which a nervous Palin shattered whatever credibility she had.
Somehow they decided US$150,000 wasn't an exorbitant amount of money for the Republican National Committee to spend on clothes and make-up for Palin and her family, even as they were promoting her as a "hockey mom" and friend of "Joe Six-pack".
They used her as the usual vice-presidential attack dog - charging that Obama was "palling around with terrorists" - even though her poll ratings could not take the negative strain.
Palin inspired the Democrats against her as much as she revved up the faithful. The running mate should, at least, not give voters pause about the ticket but Palin did.
How different could it have been had McCain chosen a running mate who could talk about economic issues in a mature, knowledgeable way? It's a mystery why McCain, who admitted that economics was not his strength, didn't see fit to balance his ticket.
Economic conditions were tricky well before the Lehman Bros collapse. And when that happened, McCain appeared to flounder, contradicting his own statements and briefly suspending his campaign.
Overall, McCain also failed to stick to a coherent message or line of attack. One minute Obama was risky, the next he was passively sitting on the sidelines. One week the campaign was all about William Ayers, the next it was about Joe the Plumber. He was a fighter, then a maverick and then a fighter again.
His debate performances were disastrous. Appearing presidential and outlining his plans for the country should have been his priorities. Instead he came across as angry and small-spirited.
In a year when voters were tired of partisan bickering and wanted seriousness on the issues, polls showed people believed McCain's campaign was the more negative.
McCain's best performances were towards the end when he was direct, impassioned and eloquent on the stump. By then it was too late.
Somehow the former military man ended up running a campaign overly focused on daily details, while losing sight of the big picture.
