Don’t Run, Sarah! Newsweek Assesses Palin’s Electoral Prospects (Again)
Two parts predictable, one part probable: Newsweek’s Daniel Stone takes a look at Sarah Palin’s Tea Party Nation convention speech and determines her unable to win a national election. Shock!
However, aside from his own unambiguous sentiment and Newsweek’s penchant for Palin mockery, is he necessarily wrong?
The basis of her speech, as she put it, was simple: rein in government spending, be more firm on national security, and keep the government out of businesses and people’s lives. And not one person in the room didn’t think she was dead right.
I doubt anyone at the Tea Party convention would disagree with that platform. Properly articulated, I also doubt most Americans would either. In fact, this seems like a solid platform for any candidate seeking office in our center-right country. Didn’t our current Commander in Chief do so? Shouldn’t that be enough?
Palin’s fiery rebuke of Washington certainly firmed her base, but it did little to widen her appeal to moderates and independents, two groups without which she’d have a real tough time passing the threshold of electoral votes.
I have my own concerns about her electability. But, would a rebuke of Washington’s runaway spending be what turns indies away? Or something else?
(At one point, she even mocked the majority of voters who voted for President Obama, asking them, “How’s that hopey changey thing working for you now?”)
Could the very qualities which engender such devotion among her fans (her willingness to charge into debate, folksy-charm, unique colloquialisms) inspire the exact opposite amongst some in the electorate? Surely we can consider personality a determining factor if:
- Her supporters laud her personality as a draw for a Palin presidential run, and
- We actually elected a man on image alone this past election cycle.
It matters. Could her personality be a liability? Also, has the media been effective in branding her inept or inexperienced? Serious questions.
A moot point, perhaps. According to Stone, her speech might have been the death knell of her presidential aspirations (not the first time we’ve heard that, mind you):
Which is to say that electorally speaking, tonight’s speech may have been a self-inflicted wound for Palin, offering ammo to opponents to argue that she’s simply too far right and too niche to win widespread support for national office.
If the presidency is what she wants at all.
That may have been the point. With tonight’s speech, Palin cemented her role as the de facto head of the tea-party movement—but in a bigger sense, as the fearless warrior leading conservatives into battle in November and beyond. That might be where she’s most effective (and undoubtedly where the pay is best). Because at this point, it’s increasingly unlikely that she’ll seek national office. Until now, the Palin guessing game has focused on whether she’s running. On her current course, she simply wouldn’t be able to win.
She might or might not decide to run in 2012. Until then, we should watch her decisions, consider her record and examine all candidates judiciously. The last time I checked, no one has the nomination yet. Let’s keep it that way until all bids are in.
Sarah Palin has a lot of skeletons in her closet. Why did she abdicate her job as Governor of Alaska? Perhaps because of so many ethics violations which were legitimate and her involvement with an ex General that she made Lt. Gov. She is a simpleton who is into herself and all the attention she is getting. She is clueless about so many important points that involve this country. Sarah Palin for President? I don't think so.
Nobody in his/her right mind woulod demand that she or anyone else stay in a job that costs her a lot of money. Would you?
A couple of left-wing loser-loonies file frivolous complaint after frivolous complaint, and she has "skeletons in her closet."
Hey! I have an idea! Any time there is a candidate that you are afraid of, just file a thousand ethics complaints against them, then claim they have "skeletons in their closet."
Really Joe? Which ethics violation was she found guilty of? What important point is she clueless on? Obama was the most unqualified candidate in US history. Re-elected in 2012? I don't think so!
BTW: I doubt no one at the Tea Party convention would disagree with that platform?
Keep dreaming, Joe. Sarah did exactly the right thing by resigning. That got her out of the liberal abuses that allowed the hateful left to bury her under a mountain of charges that they knew were false. Sarah is right on target, and she is the biggest threat to Obama's administration and the greatest hope for America to avoid socialism. God bless the Constitution of the United States, and God bless (future) President Palin!
The biggest criticism they have of her is that she wrote five words on her hand as talking points, where Obama would have needed two teleprompters. Sarah, making her critics look even sillier than usual, then wrote "Hi Mom" on her hand the next time she went out. I'm not fond of the writing notes on the hand, but Sarah used it cleverly.
How can he argue thaqt she can't win independants. Most of the people in the room, in the teaparty and who voted for Scott Brown are independants. Remember the Reagan revoloution? Wall Street bailoutsand back rooom extortion and collusion do not impressmain street at all. Corruption onan hitherto unseen scale is the O admin achilles hreel andf it cannot be offset by citing that she wore a jacket with a snowmachine logo to her husband's race.
The strength of the tea party movement is that is does not have a leader or party affiliation. The people are fed up with politicians on the right and the left doing the same things when they get to office: increasing the size and role of govt. via tax and spend policies. No offense to Sarah Palin but the tea party doesn't need a leader. We don't want to be hijacked by the republican party. This movement is a grassroots protest against establishement politics.
The following article expresses this perfectly: http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=1119
The link i provided above is incorrect. Here is the one i meant to post http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=11198. Sorry.
I'm sorry, but if Sarah Palin is the candidate for president three years from now, It is going to make my life a whole hell of a lot easier. If she wins it will make my life a dream come true. As a blogger, I will never again have to touch my computer keyboard. These things will write themselves.
I know this sounds exceedingly selfish on my part and I am embarrassed to say it in so public a forum. I hope she never goes away. For the self-described political satirist, she is the gift that keeps giving and giving and giving….
I'm so ashamed.
http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com
Tom Degan
Goshen NY
Tom, I clicked on your link and unlike Mr. Shaw (below), I was glad to give you the traffic, so clicked a couple hundred more times. You're welcome. I wonder if our host blogger Diane has a crush on Glen Beck like she does on Christopher Hitchens?
Shame on you, Shaun, suggesting I'd betray Christopher for someone like Beck!
In reality, righties like myself are routinely called RINOs for disagreeing, disliking or merely questioning both Sarah AND Beck. I diverge from many of the folks who write for Newsreal, even, concerning both personalities.
Man o man, Mr.Degan you are a piece of work. I was dumb enough to click your link and am ashamed that I've increased your traffic by one. You truly deserve to live across from an adult bookstore and tatoo parlour. When the space becomes available, perhaps you could get the apartment above them.
Sure, when Mrs. Palin was dropped onto the world stage, she wasn't ready for it. I liked her first nomination speech but, even to me, she went downhill from there. However, her Tea Party speech and the Chris Wallace interview shows that she has come a long, long way in a very short time.
Write on her hand? Give me a break! The POTUS should be so resourceful instead of needing the teleprompter in a sixth grade class!
As to the Newsweak article, the thing that jumps out is the line "undoubtebly where the pay is best" just shows the obsession with income the left have. She couldn't possibly deserve it, or, yeah, she's only in it for the money. Poor jealous fools.
Voters' perceptions of Sarah Palin get shaped generally through the lens of a PopMedia which has proven its intent to keep Palin down to their stereotypes of her. Since people are paying more attention now, as witnessed by growing opposition to Obamagenda, it's likely that more folks will make up their own minds on Palin, regardless of a rabid media.
There's nothing wrong with Palin's "personality", if by personality you mean who she is. If you mean her personality- in how you interpret it, why that bothers you, that's another problem.
***WHY IS MY INTENSE DEBATE ICON SO SCREWY??***
"There's nothing wrong with Palin's "personality", if by personality you mean who she is. If you mean her personality- in how you interpret it, why that bothers you, that's another problem."
Precisely my point. You say there is nothing wrong with her personality while another might find it completely alienating. I was speaking generally.
The majority of people who voted for Obama voted for someone with personality, but no substance.
A rudimentary investigation of him would of revealed his left-leaning ways. But his rhetoric won the
day. If people were willing to do that with someone they really didn't know, why wouldn't they do that with
someone more substantive, and with more executive experience than Obama ever had?