Sarah Palin Testing The Waters In Iowa? Republicans Getting Nervous?
Despite a bad week and a half, there are still signs that Sarah Palin is at least looking at a run for the White House in 2012. Which may be why some Republicans seem to be getting worried about her.
Scott Conroy at RealClearPolitics is reporting that staffers close to Sarah Palin are starting to make contact with grassroots Republicans in Iowa:
DES MOINES, Iowa — Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has tasked her aides with quietly gauging her level of support for a potential presidential campaign by making inquiries to a select pool of likely allies and grassroots activists in Iowa, RealClearPolitics has learned.
Key Republican officials and operatives in the nation’s first voting state had begun to assume that Palin would not run for president in 2012 since most of them have not heard a word from her or from her small circle of aides, even as other likely candidates have begun jockeying more forcefully behind the scenes. But a Palin adviser confirmed that although the 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee’s footprint has not been as heavy as that of other possible candidates, her political action committee has indeed been taking discreet steps in Iowa that would help her build a credible campaign here if she decided to launch one.
“The idea that we’re not in Iowa is inaccurate,” SarahPAC adviser Andy Davis told RealClearPolitics.
A top official in the Iowa Tea Party who insisted on anonymity to avoid betraying Palin’s trust told RealClearPolitics that a friend of SarahPAC met with him in person in Des Moines late last year and prodded him for suggestions on how Palin might mount a grassroots campaign in the state.
Earlier this month, the same Iowa Tea Party official began preliminary work on scheduling a potential invitation to Palin for a fundraiser in Iowa. RealClearPolitics independently confirmed that the Tea Party official has been in contact with Palin allies.
Even as speculation has ramped up in media and campaign circles that Palin has become increasingly unlikely to mount a presidential campaign, her aides have been strategizing on how they would organize their infrastructure in Iowa and have continued to reach out gently to close confidantes in the state.
“I know of three of four people in Iowa who have had contact with Palin’s aides,” the Iowa Tea Party official said.
This is far from a Presidential campaign, of course, and it all appears to be very preliminary, but it would at least seem to confirm that the possibility of a White House run is being discussed in the Palin inner circle. How the events of the past two weeks, and Palin’s abysmal favorability numbers, would factor into whatever decision making process they go through up in Wasila, I cannot even begin to tell you.
Meanwhile, both John Hinderaker and Mark Tapscott have argued in the past two days that Palin’s moment has come and gone. Tapscott’s analysis is particularly interesting in that he ties Palin’s current problems not so much to the Tucson shootings, but simple public fatigue:
My thought is that Palin’s rising disapproval has less to do with her response to the Tucson Massacre and more to do with public exhaustion. Between her books, her 2010 campaign prominence, the constant nagging of those on the Left who go absolutely berserk at the mere mention of her name, frequent appearances on Fox News, the dramas of her daughter’s relationship with Levi and her success on “Dancing with the Stars,” and the Discovery Channel reality TV series, Palin has been here, there, and everywhere for several months.
There is an old maxim that it doesn’t matter what they say as long as they spell your name properly. But here’s another maxim that has particular relevance for politicos in the Media Age – Too much of a good thing becomes a bad thing when there is no escaping the good thing.
The Examiner was a vigorous Palin defender during the 2008 presidential campaign and I have since greatly admired her skill in advancing her public presence in the past two years. I also think she has been subjected to arguably the most vicious media campaign to undermine her credibility since the 1964 outrages against Barry Goldwater, a good and decent man who was smeared as a nut and a nuclear whacko by journalists who knew better.
But, assuming that she in fact does entertain a possible presidential race next year, Palin has erred in doing too little to demonstrate that she is seriously and effectively preparing for higher office. A trip to Haiti with Franklin Graham, for example, is not enough to persuade people that your thoughts on foreign policy issues warrant close attention.
Indeed not, and my sense at this point is that whatever chance Palin may have had to become President is long past, to the point where even her chances at being the GOP nominee were she to run in 2012 are slipping away as Republican who actually want to defeat Barack Obama in 2012 realize there simply isn’t any realistic possibility that she’s the person capable of doing that. I’m not sure how much longer this goes on, Palin does seem to enjoy her cover-me-but-don’t-cover-me dance with the mainstream media, and the media certainly doesn’t mind paying attention to her. As I’ve said many times before, though, a reasonable politician looking at the numbers she faces would realize that she cannot win and would likely tear apart her part if she ran. The question is which Sarah Palin cares more about, the ideas she talks about, or herself.
Headline of the day: DEMOCRATIC POLLING FIRM, DEMOCRACY CORPS, PUTS PALIN WITHIN STRIKING DISTANCE OF OBAMBI IN 2012 POLL:
http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2011/01/dem-pollster-palin-down-10-to-obama.html
Not sure if this is believable, but they are certainly as credible as DailyKOS and their Lib message driven PPP polls that are padded with extra Dems. That giant thud I hear is Doug’s head hitting the floor when he heard about a DEMOCRATIC poll with Obambi below 50% and Palin within striking distance.
Before one of your Palin Hating sychophants start attacking me, I just wanted to point out I don’t care what you post, or care how many anti Palin articles you post a day. I was tweaking you and highlighting your hypocrisy since you would never post a poll like this that is neutral and good WRT to the former Alaska Gov. Btw, is this is your 10th Anti-Palin post today? I haven’t had a chance to check.
That giant thud I hear is Doug’s head hitting the floor when he heard about a DEMOCRATIC poll with Obambi below 50% and Palin within striking distance.
Ten points is only within striking distance when there is the realistic possibility that Palin can make up the ground. It’s within striking distance when the challenger is less well-known than the incumbent. None of this is the case with Palin. Too much of that 10% is included in the group that has stated, pretty regularly, that they will not vote for Palin under any circumstances.
My wife, incidentally, is among that group. She has voted for the GOP presidential nominee in every election since she was allowed to vote (and, to my knowledge, has never voted for a Democrat except perhaps in local elections). If Palin gets the nod, the only choice she has to make is whether she is voting for Obama, a third party candidate, or staying home.
“Btw, is this is your 10th Anti-Palin post today? I haven’t had a chance to check.”
Maybe you palindissometer needs recalibrating.
“Too much of that 10% is included in the group that has stated, pretty regularly, that they will not vote for Palin under any circumstances.”
That may or may not be true. If she was to enter and win the Repub nomination, that means she would have shown some mettle to Repub voters by doing well on the stump, in debates, etc. I’ve seen cases where candidates who didn’t have a shot according to conventional wisdom, change minds once they get in a race and voters look at them in that context – especially in a situation where it is a single women versus numerous men. THE big problem Palin has is that the New York/DC Liberal ecosystem (NBC, CBS, ABC, MS DNC, NY Times, Wash Post, etc etc etc) is 100% against her, and they control the message right now. I believe her unfav ratings are a direct result of the day to day pounding. That is why I say is if she can do well in debates etc, she can get past the Liberal media filter and potentially change minds. I concede it is a big IF because of the array of forces she is up against, but it IS possible.
The only thing we know for sure right now is that we cannot predict what will happen in 2012, regardless of what Liberal blogs like this and the Wash DC/New York echo chamber tells you. The economy and numerous other unforeseens between now and then may have a say. I will admit that if the economy and employment picks up, Obama will be tough to beat. Throughout history, we tend to want to give our Presidents 2 terms if the economy is doing well.
As for me personally, Gov Palin and the other candidates will have to show me a lot more before I consider voting for them in 2012. What I do know is that I’m not voting for Obama. I just like to rib the blogger here who is all Palin all the time, as if she’s in the Guy’s head. It’s like he didn’t think we heard the last 200 times he told us she couldn’t win in 2012; He has to keep repeating it to himself and posting about it seemingly every hour to convince himself.
GL to you.
Noo…. don’t throw me in that briar patch!
@Smooth Jazz:
My question is a technical one: why is it you dismiss any poll that has information that you don’t like, but are willing to construct a hypothetical in which Palin can overcome a 10 point gap because that’s the poll that comes to closest (although not that close) to your preferred outcome?
While I have no problem with the notion of looking at polls with a critical eye, the reality is that most of the polling companies you dismiss out of hand have long track records of impressive accuracy which can be checked, if one really wants to do so.
The thing is, voters have been seeing Palin in that context since McCain picked her as his running mate. Her numbers have only gone down as people have gotten to know her. She’s changing minds alright, but not in the direction she needs.
“A top official in the Iowa Tea Party who insisted on anonymity to avoid betraying Palin’s trust…”
The belief that betraying someone anonymously isn’t a violation of their trust is disturbing.
One of the reasons the GOP Establishment runs a Beltway Party that couldn’t beat Himmler in an election held in Israel is that it constantly rolls over and plays dead when the Left rolls out their propaganda campaigns.
So if we run a Milquetoast Conservative, the Left will be Nice to Us. Right? Okay. I see the thought process around here.
I for one can’t wait until Palin runs. I’ll support her enthusiastically. If she wins, great. If she loses, that would be unfortunate, but that’s why we have primaries.
What Doug and people like Hinderaker fail to take into account is that the Left and the Propaganda Ministry would do what they did to Palin to ANY conservative, not just Palin. Limbaugh has been telling us this for 20 years, but people like Doug and Frum think that they are smarter than the fat guy on the radio.
At some point, you will have to come to the conclusion that the press hates Republicans just as much as the Left does, because they are one and the same. Palin figured this out in 2008. Limbaugh much earlier. That’s called “not being a sucker”. Unfortunately, there’s a reason the Establishment GOP leads something called “the Stupid Party”. Unfortunately, the people around DC learned nothing from the Second Bush Term, and are eager to relive it’s lessons in yet another attempt to kiss up to a media that hates them and a Left that is sworn to destroy them.
When Palin is criticized by Beltway conservatives for applying the lessons learned from the failures of the Bush Message “machine” (and yes, I did put that in scare quotes) by fighting back to save her reputation, then it is not Palin who has something to learn, but the Beltway people who are lost.
Palin will be fine. It’s the Establishment that is utterly, utterly clueless.
“My question is a technical one: why is it you dismiss any poll that has information that you don’t like, but are willing to construct a hypothetical in which Palin can overcome a 10 point gap because that’s the poll that comes to closest (although not that close) to your preferred outcome?”
In case you haven’t reads my post carefully, I have no dog in this hunt. I don’t prefer Gov Palin any more than any of the other candidates. My pet peeve is the relentless pounding she takes every day because she isn’t acceptable to the Liberal talking head ecosystem. You could say I just like to stick up for the underdog, who everybody else despises so to speak.
That said, I do not trust any polls from CBS, ABC, NBC, NY Times, Wash Post, DailyKOS/PPP and all the other “media” entities because they oversample Dems to get their pro Obama message out. Period. Like the recent NBC poll that had Obama at 53% but with a D/R mix or 31/21. That is prepostorous, but they can do that because they are into messaging and pushing agendas.
I think a 10pt deficit is a huge one for her to overcome at this point, in part because she is up against a vast Lib media apparatus with only so many opportunities for her message to make it through the filter. It’s a hypothetical at this point sure and an uphill climb that will be hard to overcome, but it isn’t as far fetched as these 30 point differentials.
section9
Can’t disagree with a lot of what you say. The single biggest threat to Palin’s success isn’t some vast left-wing conspiracy, led by the hell-spawned MSM. Most of us on the other side are hoping she gets the nomination. And I mean really hoping. No, her problem is with the GOP pros who see her as existential threat to Republican down-ticket victories in 2012. They think her defeat against Obama is foregone and fear she would drag the rest of the ticket down with her. I like that theory. It reinforces my hope that you folks are successful and the GOP pros are routed.
Maybe people are tired of hearing lightweights like Palin compared to people like Barry Goldwater.
If Palin runs,Secretariat has entered the 2012 race.I promise you she will win.Why do you think they are trying to destroy her?
Just a thought: if all of the people worrying about Sarah Palin running for President were to turn instead to helping solve the job, financial, water, and energy crises, we in the US would have a far better chance to survive and prosper in the coming years. No, I do not think she is electable in 2012, but the psychic energy expended alone could lift the shuttle to orbit. In some real sense, perhaps she should run in the primaries. It would utterly exhaust the complainers, and provide a better chance for a Republican President.
Doug, are we going to discover one day that you were being paid by Sarah Palin’s PR department? After all, as Oscar Wilde said, the only thing that’s worse than being talked about is not being talked about, and you’re certainly going to insure the latter isn’t going to happen.
That is, anyone but Obama or Palin!
Smooth Jazz,
Please stop with the “I’m not a Palin fan” stuff. If you were to just defend her against salicious charges like the Tuscon shooting, that might ring true. But your obsess over every post, whether it includes opinions or actual facts involving Palin. No one is buying what your selling. Your about as neutral as a “Fox & Friends” segment on Palin.
You know what all good Liberals are saying:
“RUN, SARAH, RUN!!!!!!
“Why do you think they are trying to destroy her?”
The only people trying to “destroy Palin are the Republicans who don’t think she can beat Obama.
“Please stop with the “I’m not a Palin fan” stuff. If you were to just defend her against salicious charges like the Tuscon shooting, that might ring true. But your obsess over every post, whether it includes opinions or actual facts involving Palin. No one is buying what your selling. Your about as neutral as a “Fox & Friends” segment on Palin.”
Frankly, I don’t care what you believe. I posted my thinking and why I’m here the other day; If someone doesn’t believe it, so be it. In a nutshell: I came here looking for a “middle of the road blog” to help assess the Repub candidates for 2012 because I heard somewhere the posters here were balanced. I realize there are tons of Conservative blogs out there, but I didn’t want the conservative perspective only. I liked a darkhorse types like John Thune, but the I was open to hearing balanced perspectives on all the candidates. I am a Repub who isn’t voting for Obama this time. I had voted for him in 2008 but was turned off by the terrible health care plan and all the spending.
What I found over time was a Palin hatefest here, as bad as some of the “Liberal” blogs – both by some members of the blogging team as well as many commenters. I was surprised to find out this was primarily a Lib blog, with an obvious Dem slant. It’s OK, it’s their blog, but I found the daily drumbeat of multiple “Palin is finished” posts by certain posters kind of weird. I could see a few posts a weeks, but 2 – 3 posts a day from the same poster saying essentially the same thing (ie Palin belongs in her igloo in Alaska) struck me as very ODD. At first I thought the poster had a problem with a Repub woman like many in the Liberal media because of the obsession, but I’m not sure.
If you dislike this blog so much, Kenny G, why do you keep coming back and commenting?
In that situation, the statisticians will give more weight to Republican responses in the final numbers in order to bring the D/R influence into line with the actual ration of D/R in the population.
You honestly thought nobody is this highly paid and highly trained field has ever though of this before you came along and pointed it out? That’s amusing.
@Smooth
“I was surprised to find out this was primarily a Lib blog, with an obvious Dem slant. It’s OK, it’s their blog, but I found the daily drumbeat of multiple “Palin is finished” posts by certain posters kind of weird. ”
Hmmm. One might think, “Well, here’s an ostensibly conservative-libertarian blog that runs pieces on Sarah that belies their conservative-libertarian slant. Gosh, that’s weird. I’ve got better things to do than waste my time on these guys. On the subject, Sarah, they’re hopeless.” And never returned, chalking the whole thing up to some nefarious RINO plot. But you keep coming back.
My theory is that you need your rage fix and have found your connection.
“Well, here’s an ostensibly conservative-libertarian blog ”
NOW, I understand! The key word being “ostensibly”.
“Hmmm. One might think, “Well, here’s an ostensibly conservative-libertarian blog that runs pieces on Sarah that belies their conservative-libertarian slant. Gosh, that’s weird. I’ve got better things to do than waste my time on these guys. On the subject, Sarah, they’re hopeless.” And never returned, chalking the whole thing up to some nefarious RINO plot. But you keep coming back.”
I keep coming back because I like to mix it up with left wing zealots like you, mantis & anjinHuckster at your “Conservative – Libertarian” blog. How’s that for an explanation. My antennae tells me that hard left Kool Aid drinkers usually post at left wing blogs, so I assume that is why you are here. Ayuh!!
As conservatism has been thoroughly purged from the Republican Party, I think Sarah would make an excellent choice as its new frontwoman.
“I keep coming back because I like to mix it up with left wing zealots like you, mantis & anjinHuckster at your “Conservative – Libertarian” blog. How’s that for an explanation. ”
Heh. Sounds like a rationalization to me. Consistent with you’re being rage junky, though.
And yet you seem to like to post to this blog too. That either means you’re part of the “hard left Kool Aid drinkers”, or your theory is totally and utterly wrong. And I’m guessing you’re not a liberal.
The fact is, the authors of this blog are, by and large, conservative little-l libertarians. One is more big-L Libertarian, while another is a mostly moderate liberal, and yet others are simply unabashed Republicans. Neither you nor Sarah Palin owns the ‘right’, so not everybody that disagrees with you or her is necessarily on the ‘left’.
Aside from being the GOP’s nominee for VP, can somebody point me to some evidence that Palin is actually conservative? I’m not talking about being pro-life and shooting guns, what actual policy positions has she proposed or implemented that would make people think she’s anything like Barry Goldwater?
> In case you haven’t reads my post carefully, I have no dog in this hunt.
Which is why you obsessively post vitriolic attacks against anyone who even mildly criticizes Palin.
Oh yea, you are credible.
> what actual policy positions has she proposed or implemented that would make people think she’s anything like Barry Goldwater?
What actual policy positions has she proposed period? Her policy is self-promotion.
This is not a hard left blog, it is leftovers from KOS. Mantis you limp d**k, go hit your bong. Palin runs and beats Obama. The left is incapable of learning. The last time we had a President as far left as Obama, which was Carter, Reagan ate his lunch. Palin will kick Obama’s skinny little ass. Guess what guys? The Gov. of Hawaii could not find Obama’s birth certificate. Go figure.
> I keep coming back because I like to mix it up with left wing zealots
Making weak to pathetic arguments ad nauseam is not “mixing it up”. Sorry.
I was in the nightclub business for a long time. You are the blogging equivalent of the fat, middle-aged guy with thinning hair who thinks he is a stud after a few belts. He tries to chat up the young chicks, not noticing that the only attention he is drawing is pity and/or annoyance.
One of the reasons I got out of this business is that it was too painful to be around people like that.
Aside from being the GOP’s nominee for VP, can somebody point me to some evidence that Palin is actually conservative? I’m not talking about being pro-life and shooting guns, what actual policy positions has she proposed or implemented that would make people think she’s anything like Barry Goldwater?
She raised taxes on corporations in Alaska! Wait…
> What I found over time was a Palin hatefest
Please repost a few of these “hateful” remarks.
anjin, As a portly, middle aged, balding guy I take offense. Well, not really. I don’t drink in bars so there’s no reason for me to get tough with anyone.
SJ is far from what you are talking about. As a long time commenter here I’ve seen the leftward shift and love it when someone joins in to add common sense like he does.
There are many of us out here who don’t want to see Palin run for office but at the same we choose to defend her from baseless attacks. The bias from Taylor and Mataconis is all about the selection of stories they choose to bring up. It’s all negative, all the time. Come on, mix it up and quit picking on the candidate from the last election.
Manning hit the nail on the head about wasted energy and effort. I’m even wondering how much time I’m wasting pointing out how ridiculous it is for the Palin haters to keep going on and on and on and on. We get it so give it a rest.
Steve P. If you feel Smooth is talking sense perhaps you could show me all the “hateful” remarks that are being made about Palin. Ante up.
I certainly don’t hate Palin. I find her stupid and narcissistic, and I think she is dangerous, and I will continue to speak out against her for that reason, but she has done nothing to engender “hate”. I hope she will never have the chance to.
As for “wasted energy and effort, kindly tend to your own knitting. I will be the judge of how to spend my time and effort, just as Doug and Steven will be of theirs.
“haters” is a term used by 13 year old girls to describe people that don’t like them. Can you do no better?
BINGO. BINGO. BINGO. The fact that you are responding to a hard left Liberal, and that most of the commenters here are Libs, tells me how this once Moderate blog has evolved. Maybe it drank the Obama KoolAid; Maybe they got caught up in the NY/VA/DC Liberal echo chamber where everybody agrees with each other with minimal dissent; Who knows?? Doesn’t matter. It is obvious this is or has become a left wing blog based on their editorial policy as well as most of the commenters who are here.
Your “selection of stories” comment is dead on. It’s all anti Palin all the time. Roger Simon ran a story in Politico today that said “It’s too early to count Palin Out”. Democray Corps, James Carville polling organization, came with a poll today that put her within 10 pts of Obama in 2012, a deficit that is not insurmountable. Who knows if this is more credible than the DailyKOS/PPP poll that had her down by 30pts. THE POINT IS THOSE STORIES REMOTELY FAVORABLE TO PALIN NEVER MAKE IT TO THIS BOARD. It’s almost as if they only post the negative stuff so they can all sit in a room together and cheer on the Liberal convential wisdom without dissent – And to feed their largely left wing members.
The other critical point you made is that one doesn’t have to think Palin is the best candidate in 2012 to defend her from the Liberal echo chamber. My best to you.
A country where some people are ready to vote for a moron like Palin is a sick country.
Anyone who thinks this is a liberal blog is just delusional.
And anyone who can’t figure out that Doug is heavily anti-Palin because he is a good loyal Republican who desperately wants to avoid a Goldwater-size blowout in 2012, is just a moron.
You may disagree that a Palin candidacy would lead to such a disaster, but to deny Doug’s sincerity on this point, or to pretend that he is some liberal, is just absurd.
You are just making a fool of yourself with this nonsense SJ – if you don’t find what you want at this blog, then go elsewhere. Or if you stay, then say something new and interesting for a change.
Smoothy — If you want people to believe you’re not a Palin obsessive, you should stop writing “Palin + Smooth Jazz” on all available surfaces…
Or at least stop drawing hearts around it when you do.
****I certainly don’t hate Palin. I find her stupid and narcissistic, and I think she is dangerous, and I will continue to speak out against her for that reason, but she has done nothing to engender “hate”.***I feel the same way about Obama…..
***A country where some people are ready to vote for a moron like Palin is a sick country.***lol, Another sophisticate joins the fray…..
> we choose to defend her from baseless attacks
Have at it. Show us some of the “attacks” and give a reasonable explanation of why they are baseless. If you can’t do that, you are simply blowing hot air. I note I have yet to see a single example of “hate” directed at Palin. Put up or shut up.
****Anyone who thinks this is a liberal blog is just delusional.****lol, perhaps not, but undoubtedly, the comment section, has a nasty infestation……..
***And anyone who can’t figure out that Doug is heavily anti-Palin because he is a good loyal Republican who desperately wants to avoid a Goldwater-size blowout in 2012, is just a moron.***
Yes, plus all of the good loyal Republicans I know are card carrying members of the Jon Leibowitz Fan club, so there! 🙂
@Smooth Jazz:
Then, really (and this has zero to do with Palin), it is pointless for you to pay attention to any polls, I suppose. However, the fact of the matter is, these polls (on balance) have excellent track records. And there are various and legitimate reasons to over-sample a particular group in a given poll, depending on a host of reasons. Having said that, I think that you are over-stating the over-sampling.
The bottom line to me is that it is impossible to actually have a discussion if the assertion is “I don’t trust any of the mainstream press.”
> the assertion is “I don’t trust any of the mainstream press.”
There’s more to it than that. It’s:
“I refuse acknowledge any fact I don’t like”.
And endless supply of excuses is at hand. “MSM” “haters” “obsessed with Palin” & so on.
People have been talking about the dumbing-down of America for a long time. The process has now reached it’s logical conclusion with far-right politics. The right wing war on public education makes sense when viewed with this in mind. Educated, sophisticated & informed people would simply never fall for this crap.
@Steve Plunk:
You mean like the poll I noted this morning that showed her to be one of the GOP front-runners? That’s negative in what sense of the term?
Of course, the truth of the matter is that most of the stories about Palin are, quite honestly, of a negative nature. Her numbers are poor in terms of the general population and she would make a poor nominee for president. Further, she did quit her office mid-term and she does cocoon herself into a uber-safe media bubble. She doesn’t talk about serious policy and doesn’t demonstrate much interest in that area. Rather, she mostly speaks in platitudes and cliches.
Where am I wrong?
@Smooth Jazz:
You see, if that is what qualifies as a “positive story” (being down 10 points), then I rest my case in regards to what I said about to Steve Plunk.
Indeed, if Doug or I had posted those numbers, I suspect that this would be used as yet another example of a negative story.
Kenny – I have a great record on, “Suspended Night” by Tomasz Stanko. It’s this cool music called “jazz”. You should check it out sometime…
http://www.amazon.com/Suspended-Night-Tomasz-Stanko/dp/B0000V765G
>my sense at this point is that whatever chance Palin may have had to become President is long past
I’d have an easier time believing that if (a) her leading rivals for the nomination seemed in a good position (b) improvements in the economy were assured.
Unfortunately, both of those premises are questionable. First, the nomination. Romney is handicapped by Romneycare, and Huck is handicapped by his economic record. That doesn’t mean they can’t win–but it does present serious problems for them. Of the course the GOP might nominate a dark horse; the problem is that that hasn’t happened in over 70 years. With no clear favorite, it seems within the realm of possibility that Palin could squeak out a win. Even if a majority of Republican voters are absolutely horrified at the prospect of a Palin nomination, that won’t make her lose unless they can unify around a single alternative.
If she’s nominated, can she win in the general? Her poll numbers make it very hard to believe that would be possible. But what if the economy tanks and she’s the nominee? I really have no idea what would happen then. It would be like the old conundrum of the immovable object versus the unstoppable force, except it would be the unelectable challenger versus the doomed incumbent. We got a little taste of that sort of situation with the Angle-Reid race last year, but that doesn’t mean it’s at all predictable.
I really, really wish Palin were a serious candidate. But she has to be able to crawl out from under the Fox bubble before that happens, and she has shown no inclination to do so.
Still, I hope Palin gets the nomination, and we get a nice, crazy VP choice too — Is O’Donnell too far out of the picture? Angle? Bachmann? Brewer?
I want a VP candidate who when asked “What newspapers do you read?” is able to come up with an even better answer than “All of them”.
***I want a VP candidate who when asked “What newspapers do you read?” is able to come up with an even better answer than “All of them”.****lol, how about one that can spell better then me.
Are you sure “nervous” covers it? How about “existential terror”?
***It’s this cool music called “jazz”.***only when they sing:) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhq7fSrXn0c&feature=related
I think the reason this blog and David Frum’s are fixated on Sarah Palin is that she’s a complete ignoramus, so much so that she’s comical. The thought of her directing our foreign policy gives me the willies. Harry Truman and Ronald Reagan, neither of whom had much of an education or background in foreign affairs, made up for it by self-education, in Truman’s case, and by excellent instincts, in Reagan’s. By contrast, what I see in Palin is aggressive ignorance and the kind of recklessness I associate with George W. Bush at his worst. Frum is (or was) more closely tied to the Republican party than Joyner, but I think he and Joyner’s group of bloggers share the same feeling about Palin – she’d be a disaster for her party if nominated, and a disaster for her country and the world if she were elected by some fluke. I’ve read that the Democratic party bigwigs who persuaded FDR to drop Henry Wallace as his running mate in the 1944 election realized that Roosevelt would probably die in office and that Wallace would be a disaster as president. I think Frum and Joyner feel the same way about Sarah Palin, even if they’re too prudent to say so.