From Eccentric Flower
«July 2009 «Eccentric Flower
The Passing of Palin
I care about as much for the blitz of stories on Sarah Palin as Dan Lyke does for the recent saturation coverage of Michael Jackson. Andrew Sullivan made the point all last week that we needed to keep debunking her and her lies and hallucinations, because otherwise she might come back. He and I disagree on how desperate the Republicans are; I assume she is politically dead at this point.
But the new Lexington (the previous one having just retired from the column after thirteen years) points out that while Palin herself may be a washout, the issues that made her an attractive candidate in the first place are not going away:
Many liberal or well-educated Americans feel it their patriotic duty to point out that the Caribou Barbie is far too ignorant to be allowed anywhere near the White House. But many rural and working-class whites adore her, and resent the way she has been ridiculed.
This divide matters. Many Americans want as president someone who is exceptionally well-informed about public policy, who surrounds himself with experts, who weighs the evidence and then does what is best for the country. But few people are policy experts, so they often follow their hearts rather than their heads when deciding whom to vote for. Often, they assume that someone culturally similar to themselves will be more likely to look out for their interests. And that is why Mrs Palin is still so popular. There are an awful lot of Americans who see her as one of their own. She talks like them. She guts her own fish. She wears her faith on her sleeve. She obviously didn't go to Harvard. And when people who did call her stupid or mock her faith or her family, her fans take it personally.
The kind of people who support Mrs Palin have several grievances. They are less well-educated than the American average, so the labour market has been unkind to them for years. They are often white and male, but they do not feel privileged and they often chafe at the way affirmative-action policies discriminate against them. In short, they are the Republican Party's base. There are not enough of them to decide a general election, but more than enough to decide a primary.
The column goes on to point out that, at the moment at least, the Republicans don't have anyone who looks viable to run against Obama in the next election. My question at this point is whether they will even try, or will put up a sacrificial candidate and concentrate instead on 2016. But it's probably too soon to say; a lot depends on how Obama's term plays out.
ProfRobert:
Palin could rise vampire-like from her political grave, especially if Fox gives her a TV show.
2012 depends on the economy. If the country's still in the toilet in 2 1/2 years, I'd put my money on Romney, who can look unscary enough to lead a Republican resurgence. If the economy is recovering, I'm betting on Huckabee, who is as ignorant as Palin, but much friendlier. Obama will win then in a landslide.
I doubt the Republicans would put up a sacrificial lamb, though if I were Pawlenty, I'd wait a long time to before jumping in for 2012. 2016 would definitely be a better opportunity for him. But that said, you never know what will happen in politics. Obama could get caught in bed with a dead white boy, or something as unpredictable as Clinton (well, I guess that wasn't wholly unpredictable), Spitzer, Sanford, etc, or there's another 9/11-style attack for which Barack HUSSEIN Obama is blamed. You gotta be in it to win it.
-- 16:07, 14 July 2009 (BST)