Though I doubt it's historicity, in "I Claudius," the emperor Caligula is appointed by his predecessor Tiberius for one reason. Tiberius is very unpopular among the Romans, they will not mourn his passing. So Tiberius selects Caligula as his successor, knowing that Caligula will unleash horrors upon the Roman empire. If they did not praise him in life, thinks Tiberius, they will praise him in death once Caligula rules.
Bush is widely, and rightly, perceived to be the worst president in living memory. John McCain is an old man, and whatever his current pose, has not been popular among movement conservatives. I wonder why McCain was apparently not warned about selecting a novice like Palin--I wonder if he might not have been encouraged to pick someone whose extremism and inexperience might make her a worse president than even Bush.
It has crossed my mind--is someone in the Bush camp thinking that if Palin becomes president, then people will look back more fondly on the era of George W. Bush, since Palin might be even dumber, less experienced and more extreme by comparison?