Sarah Palin To Continue Trying To Fool Her Supporters Until November, Apparently

When she made her way to Ames, Iowa in advance of the Iowa Straw Poll, Sarah Palin seemed to make it clear that she recognized that she’d have to announce her intentions by the end of this month:

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) said her decision on whether to run for president is due “in short order,” likely meaning no later than the end of September.

(…)

“We’re still talking about it, thinking about it. And that’s what I want supporters to understand. At the same time, I want to be very fair to supporters and not keep them hanging on in perpetuity,” Palin told David Brody of the Christian Broadcasting Network. “It’s fair to them to give them an answer here, in short order, so that they can jump on board with someone else.”

Asked whether “short order” meant by the end of September, she said: “I think that that is a fair timeline for people, because fall time, they can start getting engaged with different campaigns, but still thinking about it, and really, really desiring to be a participant in the positive change that needs to happen in this country.”

Well that deadline is a mere ten days away, but last night she hinted to Sean Hannity that she’ll make a decision by November:

“There is still time, Sean, and I think on both sides of the aisle you’re going to see people coming and going from this race,” she said. “In the Republican race, in this primary, I think people are still going to be coming and going because there is still time. And I’m still one of those still considering the time factor.”

Hannity asked if her if she didn’t need to make a decision by November.

Her response: “You do, legally you do, because you have start getting your ducks lined up to have your name on these ballots.”

She added: “This is going to be such an unconventional election cycle. … Mark my word, it is going to be an unconventional type of election process.”

So unconventional that she’s basically talking about jumping into the race a week before the filing deadlines for early primaries start to kick in. Yea, that’s really going to happen. This should confirm once and for all that Palin has been playing a game with her supporters, and the media, all along. She knows she’s not running for President, but she also knows that the minute she says so her value as a media star plummets to  a point it may never recover from, especially if the GOP ends up winning the White House in 2012. So, she’s stringing everyone along, though at this point it seems like it’s only the die hard Palinistas who are still buying into the charade.

Today, those same Palinistas are touting a Marist poll purporting to show Palin within 5 points of the President in a head-to-head match. Even if you buy those numbers, though, there’s another part of the poll that shows the Republicans who purport to love her so much don’t want her to run for President:

Nearly three quarters of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents do not want Sarah Palin to run for president, according to the latest McClatchy-Marist poll.

A full 72 percent of potential GOP primary voters said they did not want Palin to enter the race. Only 24 percent said they hoped she would run.

If Palin were to run, she’d win support from 13 percent of GOP primary voters, which is not a bad conversion rate among the voters who are interested in her candidacy. But that’s a relatively small group to draw from.

The result lines up with earlier polling — conducted by Pew — that found 41 percent of Republicans would not consider voting for Palin in a presidential election.

The Palin magic, it seems, is no more.

FILED UNDER: Campaign 2012, Politicians, Quick Takes, Sarah Palin, US Politics
Doug Mataconis
About Doug Mataconis
Doug Mataconis held a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May 2010 and contributed a staggering 16,483 posts before his retirement in January 2020. He passed for too young in July 2021.

Comments

  1. Fiona says:

    Once a diva, always a diva. She’s not going to announce one way or another until the very last minute possible so that she can keep the spotlight focused on her.

    How do you spell narcissist? P-A-L-I-N

  2. Hey Norm says:

    If she did jump into an “unconventional type of election process”…which I can only interpret as a third party bid at this point…it would be devastating for the so-called republicans.
    Talk about the sucking the rice air out of the room.

  3. lauraoh says:

    Hey Norm, WTH is a “so-called Republican”?

    Someone who votes for an actual candidate?

  4. m joseph sheppard says:

    Mataconis revels in showing the Pollster aggregate poll which includes the ludicrous CBS and NBC polls which have 14% undecided or even more ludicrous “not heard enough” What he doesn’t show is the RCP aggregate of Palin versus Obama which had her 20 point s behind her in August and now 11 points behind and trending upwards.

    Where in palin’s answer to Hannity did she say she would declare IN November btw not before November.

    Anyway, I have compiled a list-with links-of the “pundits” including, especially Mataconis, who said she wouldn’t run. When/if she announces then it wll be blogged “Egg on face pundits etc” across the internet with his name at the top of the list..

  5. Hey Norm says:

    @ lauraoh…
    there are no republicans anymore. i mean…they call themselves republicans. but they aren’t really. hence the so-called republicans moniker.
    well, there are a few left…bartlett, frum, and sullivan for instance…but they have been ostracized from the party by the so-called republicans.
    it’s just like ryan proposing to abolish medicare…just because you call something a certain name…doesn’t make it that thing.

  6. Gina says:

    Palin haters are so predictably hilarious. Only they could take a poll where she’s within five points of Obama and use it to show that she’s toast. 🙂

  7. samwide says:

    those same Palinistas are touting a Marist poll purporting to show Palin within 5 points of the President in a head-to-head match-up

    Please, Jeebus.

  8. An Interested Party says:

    What he doesn’t show is the RCP aggregate of Palin versus Obama which had her 20 point s behind her in August and now 11 points behind and trending upwards.

    Oh yes, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do everything you can to get her to run…tell all your family, friends, neighbors, and anyone else you can that Palin should run and do whatever is necessary to ensure that…a grateful nation will thank you…

  9. A voice from another precinct says:

    @m joseph sheppard:
    “Anyway, I have compiled a list-with links-of the “pundits” including, especially Mataconis, who said she wouldn’t run. When/if she announces then it wll be blogged “Egg on face pundits etc” across the internet with his name at the top of the list.. ”

    Even if she runs and you get to publish your list, who will even give a rat’s a## about it?

    That’s a lot of effort to go to over what Doug says here.

  10. Jay Tea says:

    Please. I figured out years ago the secret to understanding Palin: just listen to what she actually says. Turn off the cynical BS filters you have to use on most politicians and listen to what she says, and 99% of the time she spells out exactly what she’s doing and why. Plus, she has plenty of political history that shows how she operates.

    She’s kind of the anti-Obama. He’s not only the super-politician where you have to parse each syllable, he’s also a Harvard-trained lawyer and puts in an average of 3 loopholes a sentence. And his supporters cheerfully enable him — show me a single person who actually believed him when he declared his opposition to gay marriage? His supporters just ignore it, because they know that he’s really on their side; his detractors remember it, because it was such transparent bullshit.

    In this case, I think Palin is playing a little game, for once — but her supporters aren’t the target. No, the declared Republican candidates are the target. Her candidacy is, basically, a “fleet in being” status. By keeping her options open, she poses a tacit threat to them — if they don’t give the voters the right choices, if they don’t represent enough of her positions that her supporters back, she can come in — even at the last minute — and suck up a whole lot of the oxygen in the room. She would almost instantly turn it into, at most, a three-person race and kill the candidacies of everyone but Perry and Romney.

    The vibe I get is that she doesn’t really want to, but she’s willing to if she thinks it necessary. So it’s up to the candidates to give her no reason to jump in, by making sure her supporters’ beliefs and positions are represented. And she not only knows that, but wants that.

    The instant she commits, one way or another, her leverage is gone. Her dragging it out like this makes perfect sense in this context. And is fully consistent with her history and her statements.

    Like I said… all you gotta do with Palin is listen to what she says, and what she has done in the past.

    J.

  11. Hey Norm says:

    hey JTea…

    “…Like I said… all you gotta do with Palin is listen to what she says, and what she has done in the past…”

    Seeing how you brought up what she has done in the past…how is the GOP…a party of racists…going to square Palin sleeping with Glen Rice?
    Just curious.

  12. jukeboxgrad says:

    Although I’ve said it many times, I haven’t said it in a while, so I’ll say it again: she’s running, and she will be nominated.

    Running and losing is better for her career than not running. That’s why she’s running.

    And it makes sense for her to declare as late as possible (I guess that means November). Meanwhile the other candidates can beat each other up. Perry is a bubble that is going to burst. He’s quite vulnerable on ‘crony capitalism,’ and the tea party crowd is going to become disenchanted with him, as they hear that attack from Bachmann, Palin and others. This will create a huge opening for Palin.

  13. Fiona says:

    @Jay Tea:

    The instant she commits, one way or another, her leverage is gone share of the limelight will be much more limited. Her dragging it out like this makes perfect sense in this context of narcissistic attention seeking. And is fully consistent with her history of trying to keep the cameras focused on her and her statements.

    There’s no grand political strategy here; only Palin trying to suck up as much media attention as possible.

  14. Jay Tea says:

    @Hey Norm: Let’s see… she was single at the time, and about the same age as when Obama was using drugs, so I say “meh.” None of my business.

    Pity Creepy Joe The Peeper couldn’t find some real dirt, and instead had to use an assload of unsubstantiated and utterly irrelevant rumors and innuendo. And if that’s the best he came up with, he really is as pathetic as I thought he was before — when he ripped off William Manchester for Joe’s book on Ted Kennedy, and his publisher having to settle with Jeffrey MacDonald over Creepy Joe The Peeper’s book on him.

    This is just another example of how liberals think the best way to get rid of conservative women by sexualizing them. michael reynolds is an expert on that one.

    J.

  15. Tsar Nicholas II says:

    Sarah Palin??

  16. jukeboxgrad says:

    she was single

    What most people are missing about that story is that it’s deeply unethical for a reporter to sleep with someone she’s supposedly covering.

    unsubstantiated

    Rice confirmed it.

  17. Jay Tea says:

    @jukeboxgrad: Luckily, Creepy Joe got Will Folks and Larry Sinclair to confirm the story… Al Gore was going to also testify, but was too busy releasing his chakras.

    And I fail to see how that counters the “meh” issue. She was still younger than Ted Kennedy was when he tried converting an Oldsmobile to a submarine…

    J.

  18. jukeboxgrad says:

    Will Folks and Larry Sinclair

    Try really hard and see if you can think of any reasons to find Rice more trustworthy than the people you mentioned. Hint: he doesn’t need this story to be famous.

    She was still younger

    A reporter sleeping with a source is unethical even if the reporter is young.

    I fail to see

    You could have stopped right there.

  19. Jay Tea says:

    @jukeboxgrad: Superb job of “hey, look over there!” You actually got me.

    The original question is, what effect will this have on Palin’s running or not running? Again, squat. Those who like her see it as nothing than a scumbag engaging in scumbaggery; those who get their cheap thrills off it (“ZOMG, a Republican woman actually might have slept with a black man!!!!!!”) weren’t going to support her anyway.

    J.

  20. jukeboxgrad says:

    Superb job of “hey, look over there!”

    What a nice example of projection, since that’s exactly what you were doing by mentioning various people (Folks, Sinclair, Kennedy) who are irrelevant.

    Those who like her see it as nothing than a scumbag engaging in scumbaggery

    “Scumbaggery” is a good word for what the story is about: a reporter sleeping with a source. And it’s true that her fans are already ignoring lots of other unethical behavior, but more evidence of unethical behavior won’t be helping her win new fans, which is something she needs to do.

  21. Jay Tea says:

    @jukeboxgrad: Yeah, that was me getting roped into playing along before I caught on to Norm’s little game instead of recognizing it and treating it with the dismissive contempt it deserved. Trust me, I regret it. Silly me; I tend to actually not view Norm and a few others around here with the proper suspicion they deserve, and for that I apologize.

    But back to the original topic: I still think my “fleet-in-being” theory makes sense, and the target of the strategy isn’t voters at all — but the announced candidates.

    Will it work? Is it working? I dunno, but just a few weeks ago Mitt Romney went to a Tea Party event… and drew half the crowd that Palin drew the very next day, less than 20 miles away. Oh, and Romney’s event was on a Sunday, Palin’s on Labor Day.

    J.

  22. Jay Tea says:

    @jukeboxgrad: “Scumbaggery” is a good word for what the story is about: a reporter sleeping with a source.

    Current LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, former TV reporter Mirthala Salinas, and current TV anchor Lu Parker were unavailable for comment.

    J.

  23. WR says:

    @Jay Tea: “Current LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, former TV reporter Mirthala Salinas, and current TV anchor Lu Parker were unavailable for comment.”

    Sez the man who was just whining about someone else bringing up names in an attempt to change the subject.

  24. Kylopod says:

    Although I’ve said it many times, I haven’t said it in a while, so I’ll say it again: she’s running, and she will be nominated.

    jukeboxgrad,

    You’re one of the smartest commenters here, but on this point I think you’re very wrong. I’ve actually been fairly bullish about Palin’s chances in the past, but it’s clear to me that it’s over now for her. I don’t know for sure whether she will enter the race, though I am betting against it, but if she does enter she won’t get very far. I will be fascinated if I’m proven wrong.

  25. Jay Tea says:

    @WR: Just because I don’t want to play the game now doesn’t mean I still don’t want to show I can play it well. Sometimes my competitive instinct kicks in.

    Now back to your kennel, lickspittle.

    J.

  26. jukeboxgrad says:

    jay:

    Current LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, former TV reporter Mirthala Salinas, and current TV anchor Lu Parker were unavailable for comment.

    I guess you don’t grasp that the ethical problem is for the reporter, not the source. And I guess you also don’t grasp that it’s only a problem if it’s hidden from the public while the reporter is covering that source. And I guess you also don’t realize that Villaraigosa is not a national figure, and I guess you also don’t realize that tu quoque is a logical fallacy.

    So aside from all these simple concepts you don’t understand, it’s an appropriate analogy and not an instance of “hey, look over there!” (As WR pointed out.)

    Just because I don’t want to play the game now doesn’t mean I still don’t want to show I can play it well.

    Typical Jay Tea gibberish. English translation: ‘I don’t want to play the game of misdirection, but I’m doing it anyway, because I want to show that I’m good at it. So don’t dare point out that I’m actually doing the thing that I’m actually doing, because the thing I’m actually doing is something I don’t actually want to do.’

    =============
    kylopod, thanks for the compliment, and the respect is mutual.

    if she does enter she won’t get very far

    If by “far” you mean POTUS, I agree. I just think she’ll be nominated.

    I realize she has high negatives, even inside the GOP, but the problem is that Romney and Perry are both so flawed and weak. That’s why I think she’ll be able to steamroll them and get the nomination. Think about the supporters each candidate has. Who has supporters who are deeply enthusiastic and motivated? Only her. That’s what’s going to matter.

    Anyway, we’ll see soon enough.

  27. mantis says:

    I figured out years ago the secret to understanding Palin: just listen to what she actually says.

    The vibe I get is that she doesn’t really want to, but she’s willing to if she thinks it necessary.

    Listen to her words and you will receive the vibes of truth! Starbursts, also, too.

  28. Kylopod says:

    >If by “far” you mean POTUS, I agree. I just think she’ll be nominated.

    My position for a long time has been that the more vulnerable Obama looks at the start of primary season, the less likely it is that the GOP will nominate her. Parties will occasionally nominate an “unelectable” candidate when the incumbent looks like a shoe-in, as with Goldwater and McGovern. I don’t think that’s ever happened when the incumbent is unpopular, as Obama is now. Furthermore, I simply don’t believe that the GOP base (the only place where Palinistas are found) has taken control of the presidential nominating process. It didn’t in 2008, and it won’t now.

  29. jukeboxgrad says:

    Parties will occasionally nominate an “unelectable” candidate when the incumbent looks like a shoe-in, as with Goldwater and McGovern. I don’t think that’s ever happened when the incumbent is unpopular, as Obama is now.

    The logic of this can go both ways. A lot of people in the GOP are going to be saying something like this: ‘Obama is so weak that even Palin can beat him, so maybe it’s OK if we nominate her.’

    I simply don’t believe that the GOP base … has taken control of the presidential nominating process.

    This is really the key question. Here’s another way to say it: how crazy is the GOP? I think this is the answer: pretty crazy. A lot has changed since 2008. I see pretty clear signs of how powerful the tea party is right now (at least with regard to overwhelming the sane wing of the GOP). We saw that in the way they influenced the debt ceiling debate, and we saw it last night with the vote that Boehner couldn’t control.

    So in the end it will be sane vs. crazy, in the form of Romney vs. Palin, and I think crazy will win.

    Keep in mind that the ‘crony capitalism’ message that Palin (and Bachmann) are using against Perry is also going to work well against Romney. Palin will point out that Romney’s career was largely about shipping US jobs overseas. Palin is populist and Romney is establishment. I don’t see how the latter beats the former, right now.

    Of course no one really knows, but this is just how it looks to me.

  30. mattb says:

    @jukeboxgrad:

    Although I’ve said it many times, I haven’t said it in a while, so I’ll say it again: she’s running, and she will be nominated.

    You willing to put money on that? The only chance she has is if somehow Perry and Romney self-destruct each other.

    A lot has changed since 2008. I see pretty clear signs of how powerful the tea party is right now

    I don’t see how Palin can get past Perry in this analysis. While it’s true she has a passionate base — many of whom are Tea Partiers — it’s clear that the same is true for him. The vend diagram between the two is way too close (and arguably the majority of negatives are on her side). Given than, and the fact that Perry is still a sitting Governor, has arguable a stronger record, equal charisma, and is… frankly… male — I just can’t imagine her beating him in the polls. And while Palin seems like the God, Country and Keep You Safe candidate vs Romney, have a hard time seeing her soundly trumping Perry in this category among true believers.

    All that said, Palin running would probably be a godsend for Romney — as I think she has the ability to peel off more of Perry’s support than Bachman.

  31. Kylopod says:

    >A lot of people in the GOP are going to be saying something like this: ‘Obama is so weak that even Palin can beat him, so maybe it’s OK if we nominate her.’

    Who do you mean by “people in the GOP”? Party insiders have no love for Palin. Do you mean Republican voters? A lot of them have no love for Palin either, and even many of those who do don’t want her to run. As for the Palinistas, they don’t give a flying moosehide about polls, but they won’t be deciding the primaries unless the field of candidates (the ones with significant support, that is) is really crowded come January, which seems unlikely.

    >Here’s another way to say it: how crazy is the GOP? I think this is the answer: pretty crazy.

    Ah, but we need to keep in mind the difference between crazy and stupid. The debt ceiling fiasco was brutally effective. It wasn’t cost-free for the GOP–it probably hurt Republicans in Congress–but it did get them policies they favor and helped further damage the fragile economy, thus decreasing the chances that Obama will be reelected next year. It was a brilliantly reprehensible strategy that you can’t seriously compare to nominating someone disapproved of by 60% of Americans in a year when they’ve got a good shot at capturing the White House.

  32. jukeboxgrad says:

    mattb:

    You willing to put money on that?

    I usually don’t like betting, but I might do something on Intrade.

    The only chance she has is if somehow Perry and Romney self-destruct each other.

    I think the tea party has a lot of power (inside the GOP, at least). Everyone knows they find Romney deeply unacceptable, and I think their support of Perry (as reflected in recent polls) is based on not knowing him too well. So I see that support fading. Did you hear the crowd tonight? Perry has a big problem with illegal immigration. I think a lot of the people supporting him in recent polls have not heard about that problem yet, but tonight you could hear the crowd telling Perry that he’s in a lot of trouble on this issue.

    I don’t see how Palin can get past Perry in this analysis. While it’s true she has a passionate base — many of whom are Tea Partiers — it’s clear that the same is true for him.

    I don’t see Perry having a passionate base. I see a lot of people who have a big crush on him because he looks great from a distance, but a lot of that beauty (i.e., traits that are appealing to the tea party) is only skin-deep. Scratch the surface and you find a lot of ‘moderate’ and ‘establishment’ baggage.

    Perry is still a sitting Governor, has arguable a stronger record, equal charisma, and is… frankly… male — I just can’t imagine her beating him in the polls

    In a general election, if the two candidates were Palin and Perry, then Perry would win, for the reasons you mentioned. But in the eyes of the tea party, no one can match the excitement created by Palin, and Perry, like Romney, has done too many things that are inexcusable.

    Palin running would probably be a godsend for Romney — as I think she has the ability to peel off more of Perry’s support than Bachman.

    Yes, when Palin enters, the immediate effect will be to peel off votes from Perry, and Romney will like that. But down the road, the tea party crowd will have to choose either Perry or Palin, and I think they’ll pick Palin, and then Perry will drop out. And you know what I think will happen after that.

  33. jukeboxgrad says:

    kylopod:

    Who do you mean by “people in the GOP”? Party insiders have no love for Palin. Do you mean Republican voters?

    I mean a certain segment of R voters, who are lukewarm on Palin, but will go along with her in a scenario where Obama looks so weak that even Palin could beat him. I think there are a bunch of R voters who like her, but don’t want her to run because they accept that she is unelectable. But what if Obama looks very weak? They will let go of this concern.

    As for the Palinistas, they don’t give a flying moosehide about polls, but they won’t be deciding the primaries

    Well, that’s the key question. I think they are powerful enough that they will prevent Romney and Perry from getting too much momentum.

    It was a brilliantly reprehensible strategy that you can’t seriously compare to nominating someone disapproved of by 60% of Americans in a year when they’ve got a good shot at capturing the White House.

    We could try to figure out whether the debt-ceiling events helped or hurt the GOP in the end, but that’s not the issue. My point in making the comparison is to show that the establishment wing of the GOP (as embodied by McConnell, Boehner, Cantor et al) was relatively helpless, in that story. It could be that they ended up with an outcome that was OK for them, but the thing to notice about the process is that they weren’t really in charge. Events were being driven by the tea party, which is now essentially a kind of Frankenstein monster.

    So this isn’t about what’s rational, or what’s truly best for the GOP. It’s about the kind of decisions that a group makes when the loudest and most motivated people are a bunch of nuts.