The End Of Sarah Palin?

One columnist argues that Sarah Palin's response to the Arizona shootings mark the end of whatever political future she might have had. He's probably correct.

In the Los Angeles Times, Doyle McManus asserts that the Arizona shootings, and most importantly, Palin’s not-very-well-received response to the controversy that erupted thereafter, will effectively mark her end as a serious political force. McManus acknowledges, and I agree, that the argument that Palin is in any responsible for the shootings is absurd, but, he argues, that doesn’t really matter:

The Arizona shootings and their aftermath will probably be remembered as the end of Palin’s chances of being taken seriously as a Republican presidential candidate. She had an opportunity to rise to an occasion, and she whiffed.

Palin’s viability as a presidential candidate had already been diminishing. The decline started with her abrupt resignation from her day job as governor of Alaska in 2009. Last year, one of massive success for conservative Republicans almost everywhere, she had the almost unique distinction among major GOP figures of seeing her standing plummet.

(…)

In surveys of Republican voters, Palin still ranks as one of the four top choices for the 2012 presidential nomination, along with former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. But the most important numbers aren’t going her way. In an NBC-Wall Street Journal poll last month, 50% of respondents said they had an unfavorable view of Palin; that’s huge. Only 20% said they had negative feelings toward Romney. A year earlier, Palin’s negative rating was 40%. Her principal accomplishment over the past year, it seems, has been to alienate more voters.

Actually, as this chart shows, the general public’s opinion of Palin has gotten steadily worse the more it has gotten to know about her since she was introduced to the country on August 29, 2008:

Even more problematic from Palin’s perspective is that virtually everyone seems to have made up their mind about her. In one poll, the number of people who said they had no opinion about her or didn’t have enough information to form an opinion was in the single digits. That’s a problem for a potential candidate because it means that, in order to succeed, you have to convince people who don’t like you to change their mind, which is a much harder task than educating people who don’t have an opinion about you yet. Add to this the fact that Palin is the most polarizing of all the potential 2012 GOP nominees and the fact that, according to one recent poll, 2/3 of the public said they would never vote for her, and the idea of Sarah Palin ever being President of the United States begins to look pretty silly.

And that was before the controversy that erupted after the shootings and the way that Palin mis-handled it:

Palin had a chance with her statement on the Tucson tragedy to show voters she’s equal to the demands of the presidency. Instead, the eight-minute video she released Wednesday reflected her chosen role as lightning rod of the right. Rather than rise to the occasion, she continued the partisan slugfest.

Noting that heated rhetoric was nothing new in an America where politicians used to resort to dueling with pistols, she went on to defend vigorous disagreement. “If you don’t like a person’s vision for the country, you’re free to debate that vision. If you don’t like their ideas, you’re free to propose better ideas.”

It would have been good if she had stopped there. But then, with characteristic passion, she turned to what she knew would be her most memorable line: a charge that her critics are the ones guilty of fomenting violence.

“Especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn,” she said. “That is reprehensible.”

(…)

A “blood libel” isn’t just a groundless charge that something sparked bloodshed. It is used primarily to refer to the monstrous anti-Semitic charge that Jews kidnapped and killed Christian infants for ritual use, a falsehood that provided a twisted justification for pogroms.

Palin was justified in accusing her critics of unfairness in using the tragedy as a talking point and in pointing a finger at her. But she went much further than that: She asserted that their argument “serves only to incite … violence.”

Consider that assertion for a moment: Palin says her words could not possibly have created a climate of violence, but claims her opponents’ words are certain to.

Nobody else in the media seems to have picked up on that particular logical flaw in Palin’s argument — most were focused on the “blood libel” phrase itself — but McManus is absolutely right here. After making an eight minute speech in which she purports to argue that it is improper to accuse someone of inciting violence when they strongly advocate their political views, Palin goes on to say that her critics are inciting violence when they criticize her strong advocacy of her political views.

It’s similar to times in the past when Palin has asserted that people who criticize her are somehow violating her rights. In the final days of the 2008 campaign, she complained that journalists who were asking questions about her and her record were violating her First Amendment rights and that such journalists were “a threat to democracy.” During the Carrie Prejean beauty pageant/gay marriage kerfuffle, she accused the media and pageant officials of violating Prejean’s First Amendment rights. Back in May she essentially said that journalists who printed stories she didn’t like were a threat to freedom of the press. And, most recently, she invoked the First Amendment to defend Dr. Laura Schlesinger and Juan Williams when they got caught up in media firestorms of their own creation.

As the chart above shows, while it may be an argument that plays well with her base, it is not one that plays well with the American public as a whole.

McManus goes on to theorize that Palin will wind up being the leader of just one faction of the GOP coalition, and that’s certainly possible but it’s hard to see how she would last for very long as a power center in the GOP if she isn’t the nominee in 2012, or when she loses if she somehow does become the nominee.

Yes, Sarah Palin was unjustly dragged into the aftermath of the Tuscon shootings but, as McManus and Steven Taylor both argue, she had an opportunity to try to turn things around. She clearly blew it.

FILED UNDER: Politicians, 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. DMan says:

    “Sarah Palin knows angry speech isn’t a call to violence. Unless it’s angry speech directed at Sarah Palin in which case it is a call to violence.” – Stephen Colbert

  2. Wayne says:

    Re “mark her end as a serious political force. “

    People and their fantasies.

  3. Jack says:

    There are far too many people on the right who worship blood, violence, and death (of the “correct” people who should be “targeted”) for Sarah Palin to lose whatever influence she has gained. She may never have been a real, viable candidate for President, but I’ll bet Rush Limbaugh has similar poll numbers and yet he is still influential, no matter how vile and hateful he gets.

  4. steve says:

    The chart that matters is the one for Republicans. She has a very solid base that will vote for her no matter what. If the economy remains weak, she has to run. She will be the automatic front runner. Given the nomination process, she will win it, unless some states decide not to move. The only way she loses is if Huckabee decides to run and learns how to organize, or a dark horse governor takes off (Petraeus runs?). Even then, I expect that evangelicals will still prefer Palin.

    Steve

  5. Nightrider says:

    I totally disagree that this is the end of Sarah Palin as a serious political farce.

  6. george says:

    I’m pretty sure the democrats are even now working on strategies to help Palin get the republican nomination … she’s guaranteed to bring out their vote. People will walk twice as far to vote against someone as they will to vote for someone.

  7. sam says:

    She can always be a hunting guide in the Great Frozen Upthere.

  8. Smooth Jazz says:

    “Yes, Sarah Palin was unjustly dragged into the aftermath of the Tuscon shootings but, as McManus and Steven Taylor both argue, she had an opportunity to try to turn things around. She clearly blew it.”

    Here we go again: Another sanctimonious lecture from the Palin hating peanut gallery. NOTHING she said or done could have appeased You, Mr McManus and all the other Libs biting at her ankles. You have been hiving up “Palin is Finished” posts day after day for weeks now.

    Let’s not kid ourselves: All McManus and other Liberal writers have done is given you a chance to reinforce your own bias. Look at the bright side: You get to continue your Palin hit jobs, giving the Palin Hating shooting gallery here the opportunity to pat themselves on the back in this Anti-Palin echo chamber.

  9. EddieInCA says:

    I, for one, wants Palin to run. I want her to run and I want Obama to win 50 states in the biggest blowout ever, to shatter the current GOP and bring back the sane voices within the GOP so that the two parties can again work together to solve the very serious problems that this country faces.

    I want Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, Gallagher, Savage, Hewitt, Lowry, Goldberg, Hoft, Geller, and the entire Tea Party to be pushed back to the extreme fringe where they belong, as opposed being included in the mainstream. These extremists will always have 20% support. It should be presented as such – a small minority.

  10. ponce says:

    I plan on voting for her in my state’s Republican primary.

    I haven’t felt as good about a decision to vote Republican since I voted for Ronald Reagan when he was running against Jimmy Carter.

    As for Palin, I think it’s obvious that now that her looks are fading rapidly she’s heading for late night infomercial stardom….I could see her peddling something like the Slap Chop.

  11. Patrick T. McGuire says:

    “… will effectively mark her end as a serious political force.”

    Sounds like wishful thinking to me.

  12. mantis says:

    Notice how Kenny G labels everyone who doesn’t love the Snowbilly Grifter with all his/her heart a liberal? He’s not alone. If that’s the metric, than about 80% of the country are die-hard liberals! How does that make you feel, Kenny?

  13. michael reynolds says:

    I don’t think this changes anything. She never had a chance of winning the white house. She’s a faction leader. She will remain a faction leader.

    The question was never could she win the WH or even the nomination. The question was always how much damage would she and her people do to the GOP?

    Every time some establishment GOP type tries to dismiss her the faction clings tighter. They grow strong on contempt. And they are perfectly capable of “goin’ rogue.” Bless their pointy little heads.

    The GOP will spend the next 2 years alternately trashing Sarah and licking her pumps, moving ever further to the right in an effort to capture her wingnuts. Example? Pawlenty on DADT today. They won’t be able to resist the gravitational pull of the Tea Party/Palinistas who are probably a solid third of the GOP. The GOP will gay-bash and race-bait and pray at the altar of the almighty gun because they don’t really stand for anything other than tax cuts for wealthy people. They have no center of gravity, so the true believers, the wingnuts, will carry the day.

  14. jwest says:

    Liberals apparently are prone to conscience dreaming.

  15. James Young says:

    Liberals and people who pretend to be libertarians, jwest.

  16. There’s no reason a libertarian would be a Palinista, James.

    It’s called looking at reality.

    Sarah Palin will never be President and her influence in the GOP will decline steadily after 2012

  17. Wayne says:

    “There are far too many people on the right who worship blood, violence, and death” and “no matter how vile and hateful he gets”

    Jack you are the vile and hateful one.

  18. Wayne says:

    michael Reynolds
    You remind me of the Jets saying how bad of a QB Brady is. If he was that bad of a QB and that bad for NE, they wouldn’t be attacking him.

  19. john personna says:

    This line does not rise to an adult morality:

    McManus acknowledges, and I agree, that the argument that Palin is in any [way] responsible for the shootings is absurd, …

    Again, we see the binary thinking that “if you can’t pin it on me, I’m home free.” As someone said, all blacks and whites, no grays.

    We all share a responsibility to shape civil discourse and the avoid violent rhetoric. To the extent that we stumble, then we are in some small way guilty.

    The really bizarre thing is that Doug later bolds a segment of McManus’ article that recognizes this:

    Consider that assertion for a moment: Palin says her words could not possibly have created a climate of violence, but claims her opponents’ words are certain to.

    Sorry Doug. Contradiction alert. If that make sense to you, you have to unwind your earlier claim.

  20. john personna says:

    BTW, we apparently have another one:

    The FBI has arrested a Palm Springs man, accusing him of leaving threatening voicemails for Washington state Congressman Jim McDermott.

    link

  21. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says:

    Doug, will stake your journalistic career on that statement? If you are a realist I am the Hindu god Shiva. Doug, did you know in your picture which accompanies your “Doug Mataconis says:” you look strikingly like Jared Loughner. Think not? Put the two photos side by side. Yours and his mug shot. Without the baseball cap. That statement you made. She will never be President and her influence in the GOP will decline steadily in 2012 seems as delusional as what your look a like had to say and write.

  22. Axel Edgren says:

    Damn Jazz, you are really bitter that your team didn’t manage to hammer Palin’s splendidness and innocence into people, huh?

    You managed to present McCain as a statesman (rather than a bitter shell of a man who campaigned like he was mentally ill) and you try to turn Ryan into a responsible fiscal disciplinary even though he is a fraud.

    But now the pitbull is out of the bag and no one really likes how it looks. Even the republican memetic machine can’t pass of every one of its own as a respectable person. Hurts to have to make an effort rather than just use marketing.

    “As someone said, all blacks and whites, no grays.”

    *cough* =D

  23. Gustopher says:

    It’s not like she had to do anything all that complicated. Even simply acknowledging that in retrospect the crosshairs were in bad taste, while asserting that they were not the cause, and showing a little tiny bit of empathy and humility — even that bare minimum would have been fine, and she couldn’t or wouldn’t do it.

    That’s it. Instead we got surveyor’s marks and blood libel.

  24. Axel Edgren says:

    “She will never be President and her influence in the GOP will decline steadily in 2012 seems as delusional as what your look a like had to say and write.”

    You and I both seem to still hold hopes for Palin being a dominant force in the GOP and also the 2012 nominee for president.

  25. michael reynolds says:

    Wayne:

    Recall that I’ve said on numerous occasions that the more Palin is attacked the more the Palinistas rally around her.

    I want you to love her Wayne.

  26. Hope springs eternal, is that it?

  27. An Interested Party says:

    “Sounds like wishful thinking to me.”

    Indeed…it has already been well established that libertarians and conservatives like James and Doug rightly realize that if she is the GOP nominee in 2012, the president will easily cruise to reelection…of course they would prefer her political power to come to a quick end…

    “Liberals apparently are prone to conscience dreaming.”

    On the contrary…liberals WANT her to run and win the GOP nomination…

  28. tom p says:

    “Hope springs eternal,….”

    yes, please oh please oh plrase let her run….

  29. Smooth Jazz says:

    “She will never be President and her influence in the GOP will decline steadily in 2012 seems as delusional as what your look a like had to say and write.”

    Doug is a left wing elitist, on par with Daily “Mission Accomplished Sarah” KOS and the other “I’m better than You” Lib snobs who were blaming the former Alaska Gov before the wounded even made it to the hospital on Sat. He lives in that Liberal echo chamber with the other JournOlista Palin Haters who all shout kimbaya at each other in that anti-Palin vortex. He has no clue what’s going to happen in 2012, or 2016 for that matter. He likes to mutter that to himself almost like a “I hope to Hell That Happens” self gratification fantasy.

  30. mantis says:

    Kenny G reminds us again that Saturday’s biggest victim is Sarah Palin.

  31. Smooth Jazz says:

    “Notice how Kenny G labels everyone who doesn’t love the Snowbilly Grifter with all his/her heart a liberal? He’s not alone. If that’s the metric, than about 80% of the country are die-hard liberals! How does that make you feel, Kenny?”

    How many times do I have to tell you: I am not a big fan of Kenny G. I liked a few songs on Mr Gorelick’s 1984 “Duotones” Album, “Don’t Make Me Wait” fronted by former Tower of Power Lead Singer Lenny Williams, and “You Make Me Believe” fronted by Claytoven Richardson. I don’t like much else from Kenny. I’ve said many times my favorite saxophonists are Najee, Gerald Albright, Nelson Rangell, Andre Ward and the late great John Coltrane. Indeed, among my favorite artists of all time is Robert Winters and Fall who produced the remarakble “Magic Man” album in 1981:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7PFUs4vF6k&feature=related

    The fact that you are here spewing venom is what convinced me that this is a left wing blog. The vast majority of people here spew venom at former Gov Palin and Repubs. That tells me all I need to know about the Liberal echo chamber here.

  32. mantis says:

    How many times do I have to tell you: I am not a big fan of Kenny G.

    I don’t know. Keep trying.

    The fact that you are here spewing venom is what convinced me that this is a left wing blog.

    It’s not my blog, Kenny. You’ve posted here enough; you’d think you’d know whose blog it is.

  33. Rock says:

    Caribou Barbie Strikes Again!

    Sarah speaks.
    Lefties defecate involuntarily.
    Toilet paper shortage across nation.

    Sarah knows exactly what she is doing. She knew the psychotic reactions she would cause among libtard lemmings and rhino dogs. It worked. Your actions and hatred of almost anyone and everything, including yourselves, is part of what caused your shellacking last November. I beg you please, keep up the good work. Drink some tea and keep digging. Grab a few extra rolls of toilet paper and keep flinging poop. It becomes you. Meanwhile the Tea Party will stock up on 50-gallon barrels of shellac for 2012.

  34. sam says:

    “Sarah knows exactly what she is doing”

    Dude, she could give a flying fvck what her “enemies” think right now about her.

    Her task, and she is succeeding extremely well, is to gin up her base so she can win some primaries. All her bullshit is directed right at you and your co-religionists. Or, as is more accurate, co-dupes. She plays you guys like violins. As for the rest of us, she could care less.

  35. PJ says:

    Not sure if this is the end of Palin.This will all fuel the notion of her as a victim, so if she decides to run for the Republican nomination, I think this helps her.

    The other republican candidates will attack her, so if she doesn’t win the republican nomination, the supporters will then demand an independent run, claiming that the establishment republicans should be punished.

    The end of Palin will be the general election, where she will lose, and most likely will lose big.
    After that the “Republican elite” will start demanding super-delegates so that someone like her can never be nominated again.

    This will all be fun to watch.

  36. An Interested Party says:

    “Your actions and hatred of almost anyone and everything, including yourselves, is part of what caused your shellacking last November.”

    Actually, the state of the economy is what caused the “shellacking” last November, nice jump into soap opera land, though…

    “Meanwhile the Tea Party will stock up on 50-gallon barrels of shellac for 2012.”

    To be used against the GOP establishment, no doubt, seeing as how they have already disappointed the Tea Party crowd and will continue to do so…poor Tea Party types…soon they will know exactly what it is like to be treated as the Social Conservatives have been…very useful at election time, but getting their actual issues acted upon? Not so much…

  37. Troke6 says:

    Of course there is also the possibility that SP is going for what I call the Jesse Ventura vote, that bunch of people who have never voted because they never saw reason to but now see a chance to ‘stick it to the man’. In Minn, it was H. Humphrey III and his ilk. Look at her Alaska series and see who she is pandering to and who she is sticking it to. Add them to her solid base and she is a contender, folks. Let the country be in a shambles in 2012 and she is a real contender as people might vote for anything other than O in pure desperation.

  38. John says:

    So does this mean that Doug will now stop obsessively writing about her?

  39. Sophie says:

    http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/2011/01/lets-talk-about-blood-libels-and-those.html

    “…..A blood libel is a false accusation that someone else has deliberately caused the shedding of blood in order to harm that person or people, advance one’s own political and ideological agenda, and stir up hatred for them in a manner that might lead to the shedding of their blood in revenge…..”

    Over and above the fact that politicians and pundits of all stripes have been comfortable using the term “blood libel” in a general way (such as Al Gore accusing the GOP of “blood libel” for claiming he wanted to disallow military ballots in 2000), I think Rubin’s definition fits in this case and his analogy is correct, but hopefully the result won’t be. An AZ Tea Party leader is already getting death threats. Palin has been getting death threats since day one and those have gone off the charts this week. Be careful what you encourage, Doug.

  40. Sophie says:

    “…..Of course there is also the possibility that SP is going for what I call the Jesse Ventura vote, that bunch of people who have never voted because they never saw reason to but now see a chance to ‘stick it to the man’. In Minn, it was H. Humphrey III and his ilk…..”

    Er, Humphrey was a very mild centrist mainstream politician. No one got excited about him. You must be thinking of Eugene McCarthy or George McGovern. In some cases wikipedia is your friend.

  41. Kylopod says:

    Doug, will stake your journalistic career on that statement?

    I’ve never heard of a journalist losing his job over a bad prediction. In 2007, several well-known pundits confidently predicted Obama could never win the 2008 election. It doesn’t seem to have slowed their careers down.

    Of course, they didn’t have anything close to the factual support Doug offers in this post, and it’s striking to me that none of Palin’s defenders in this thread have even attempted to counter the evidence he provides. What is their take on the polls showing Palin’s consistently high unfavorable ratings? How is she supposed to win all those voters back? Do her defenders think the polls are just made up out of whole cloth? I have no idea, since they just ignore the evidence as if it doesn’t even exist and proceed to post snarky, content-free comments about how ridiculous and irrelevant all of Palin’s critics are.

    That’s what I’ve found about most Palin defenders: they don’t know how to debate, and they seem to think all they need to do to counter fact-based argumentation is engage in angry, bitter cheerleading, without having a clue how lame it sounds to most people.

  42. Jay Tea says:

    Anyone wanna set up a betting pool on how many times Doug declares Sarah Palin’s political future dead between now and, say, the end of the year? I’m gonna hold off on a prediction for now, but I’ll put it somewhere between “Jean Grey” and “Kenny McCormick” — maybe somewhere in the “Jason Voorhees” or “Freddy Krueger” range.

    J.

  43. An Interested Party says:

    “That’s what I’ve found about most Palin defenders: they don’t know how to debate, and they seem to think all they need to do to counter fact-based argumentation is engage in angry, bitter cheerleading, without having a clue how lame it sounds to most people.”

    In other words, their M.O. is the same as that of the person they defend…

  44. Rock says:

    Yes, IP, almost like the cheer leading at the memorial last night. Someone please tell me why the obsession with Sarah. I don’t understand it. If she is marginal and not a viable candidate why the obsession? Why? Would it not be better to simply ignore everything she says to does?

  45. Axel Edgren says:

    Because even a small probability of a cataclysm is worth keeping an eye on.

    Out of all the degenerate, confederate, economically ignorant and plain unworthy GOP contenders for the GOP nomination, Palin is no longer the most probable winner but she is by far the biggest threat to the US’ health since… The last republican president.

  46. ponce says:

    “If she is marginal and not a viable candidate why the obsession? Why?”

    Because she is America’s greatest unintentional comedienne.

  47. Jay Tea says:

    Remove the sex-designating suffix, ponce, and it’s no contest: she’s blown out of the water for that title by Joe Biden.

    You know… the guy she was running against in 2008.

    J.

  48. Anna Gee says:

    Finally,the poison that is Sarah Palin may fade away. We can ony hope. She is a constant reminder that IDIOCRACY, is not a comedy – it’s a documentary.

  49. Rock says:

    Axel Edgren said:

    “Out of all the degenerate, confederate, economically ignorant and plain unworthy GOP contenders for the GOP nomination, Palin is no longer the most probable winner but she is by far the biggest threat to the US’ health since… The last republican president.”

    Alex, please explain what makes a candidate worthy of the Presidency. What? What made Obama worthy? When did Palin become the most probable candidate? I don’t recall that. And how is it that Palin the biggest threat to US health when Pelosi and Company left us with hemorrhoids and with rectal thermometers stuffed in every orifice

  50. Ben Wolf says:

    Kylopod makes an excellent point, and Jay or Rock should respond to it. What will Sarah do to overcome her very high negative numbers? How is she going to revamp her image sufficiently to become a contender in the next election?

  51. Rock says:

    Ben,

    Before I can respond with suggestions I first need to know from Alex what makes a candidate worthy of the Presidency, and what made Obama worthy? You know, what are the qualifications for worthiness?

    That said, the absolute first thing Sarah Palin needs to do is . . . switch parties.

  52. Ben Wolf says:

    Rock,

    I don’t find Alex’s opinion relevant. I want to know what Palin’s supporters think. And I would really prefer not to get flippant answers about switching parties, because they aren’t answers.

    Regardless of the reasons, Sarah has high negative numbers in every poll. How will she persuade a sufficient number of those people to vote for her (assuming she runs for office; my personal opinion is she has no intention of doing so)?

  53. mantis says:

    And how is it that Palin the biggest threat to US health when Pelosi and Company left us with hemorrhoids and with rectal thermometers stuffed in every orifice

    I don’t think your hygiene issues are Pelosi’s fault.

  54. Mart Martin says:

    All this Palin is “gone” talk seems rather premature, as are most political pronouncements by the left-wing. Especially amusing are the folks who want Palin to run so Obozo can carry all 57 – Obozo’s words, not mine – states. These folks should remember another ‘conservative’ ex-governor whom the Democrats, especially Carter, was so eager to run against. All the leftwingers believed that he was stupid, couldn’t be elected and that any presidential election in which he was the nominee would be a blowout for the Democrats. Do you folks remember 1980 and 1984? Evidently not, because the leftwing got the nominee they wanted and he trounced them – twice. Obozo has had a rocky 2 years, given that he was so initially unprepared to be president. He appears to have learned little during that time, has kept almost none of his campaign promises – he’s still shredding the consitution, a la GW Bush, as the Left-wing used to charge – and has been exposed as basically a sham and fraud, although an articulate one. The leftwing was wrong before, and they’r wrong here. Palin can win, and the leftwing should stop believing that she can’t. One should never underestimate a political opponent, as the leftwing does over and over and over to their eventual chagrin. But, that’s to be expected when all the leftwing can do is proclaim their adversaries as “stupid.” Stupid is doing the same thing over and over with the same results. Appears that the leftwing is barreling down that same primrose path again.

  55. Kylopod says:

    All this Palin is “gone” talk seems rather premature

    I agree.

    All the leftwingers believed that he was stupid, couldn’t be elected and that any presidential election in which he was the nominee would be a blowout for the Democrats.

    Reagan didn’t have a +50% unfavorable rating less than a year before the primaries.

    has kept almost none of his campaign promises

    People who have been keeping track would disagree.

    http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/

    Palin can win, and the leftwing should stop believing that she can’t.

    Why? If you want her to win, isn’t it better than the “leftwing” be caught off guard?

    One should never underestimate a political opponent

    Agreed. That’s why conservatives need to stop underestimating Obama.

  56. Jay Tea says:

    Ben, I’ve spent YEARS saying how I don’t pay attention to polls, how I don’t get into arguments about what polls say and mean and REALLY mean, about what’s a valid poll and what’s a biased or a flawed or a skewed one… ain’t gonna start now. Sorry.

    J.

  57. sam says:

    “These folks should remember another ‘conservative’ ex-governor whom the Democrats, especially Carter, was so eager to run against. ”

    Don’t make us laugh. Sarah Palin’s not qualified to have carried Reagan’s script case.

  58. “The End of Sarah Palin?”?

    Trolling for hits? I think your obsession with Sarah Palin’s end is disturbing.

  59. An Interested Party says:

    “All this Palin is ‘gone’ talk seems rather premature, as are most political pronouncements by the left-wing.”

    You’re confused…Doug certainly isn’t “left-wing”…and, actually, the real left wing would prefer she not go anywhere, as her nomination to be the GOP standard bearer in 2012 would guarantee the president’s reelection…

    “Do you folks remember 1980 and 1984?”

    Do you remember 1964?

    “Stupid is doing the same thing over and over with the same results.”

    Indeed, like putting the GOP back in partial power and actually expecting them to do anything to be fiscally responsible…

  60. Anon says:

    Insty says it best:

    “…But here’s what’s going on in the dance between Palin and what she calls the “lamestream” media: Every time they attack her, they wind up doing something that hurts them worse than it hurts her. She may not become President, and she may not even want to be President — though, regardless, it’s in her interest to keep everyone guessing as long as possible — but with little more than an Internet connection and Facebook she’s done more lasting harm to their position than anybody else. Last night Barack Obama threw them under the bus over the whole “rhetoric” question, just hours after she had managed to work them into a snarling frenzy with an Internet video. Even though it’s hurting them, they can’t — and I mean, literally, psychologically can’t — leave her alone. And she’s getting rich the whole time.

    So I don’t know about “Presidential,” but who’s dumb, here?”

    http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/113090/

  61. An Interested Party says:

    “Insty says it best…”

    Who knew that delusional wishful thinking qualified as saying it best…

  62. Herb says:

    “So does this mean that Doug will now stop obsessively writing about her?”

    Drink!

    “Someone please tell me why the obsession with Sarah.”

    Drink!

    “I think your obsession with Sarah Palin’s end is disturbing.”

    Drink!

    (PS. Those comments came from three different people, John, Rock, and Charles Austin, all of whom are apparently reading off the same talking points.)