Home > Alex Massie

Wednesday 10 February 2010

Sarah Palin is Mitt Romney's Useful Idiot

Tuesday, 17th November 2009

The glib answer to this is to suggest that she'd do the party a great service by not running at all. Yesterday I wrote that she's a "wrecker not a uniter" and that she could hijack the primary season to disastrous effect. That's clearly one possibility. But there are others, including some which might actually help the GOP and not merely by demonstrating the limits of Palinism and, consequently, lancing that particular boil.

Though I think he under-estimates Palin's fund-raising potential, Daniel Larison runs through some of the that make it most unlikely that Palin can actually win the GOP nomination. And as Daniel says, right now the most probable beneficiary of a Palin candidacy is our old friend Shameless Mitt Romney.

Until now Romney has been tacking towards the nationalist base. But Mitt's not very good at phoney populism and it shows. Put Palin in the race, however, and the equation changes: there's no point in Romney going after the type of voters most attracted to Palin (and, to a lesser extent, Mike Huckabee) which, mercifully for him, might spare Romney the embarrassment of trying, once again, to be something he's not. That would give Romney the space, and the motivation, to focus on what he does best: present himself as the problem-solvig technocrat who knows how to get things done.

True, there remains the problem of his Mormonism and his well-earned reputation for flip-floppery but in a field of adolescent midgets (thus far) Romney has the chance to present himself as the only grown-up in the room. Since the GOP, unless it changes the rules, awards delegates on a winner-takes-all basis, Romney only needs a plurality of voters to prevail. When push comes to shove, the Republican party will decide against lobotomising itself.

This, then, presents Romney with the opportunity to run the campaign he should have run in 2004. He's never going to be an exciting candidate and he should probably cease trying to be such. Putting Palin in the race, however, allows Romney to be Romney without having to pander (too much!) or make a fool of himself by trying to persuade the Palinistas that, deep down, he's one of them.

All this may yet change, not least since it's possible that other candidates more exciting than Tim Pawlenty will also join the fray. But in as much as she serves a useful purpose, Palin's presence in the race allows Romney to concentrate on what he does best and, should he win the nomination, escape the primary season without having destroyed the GOP's chances to put up a decent fight in the fall.

As I say, this is all some distance away, but, at least potentially, this is one scenario in which Palin could actually help, not hurt, the Republican party: she would make the eventual nominee look much more respectable than might be the case if he has to spend the primary season wrestling for the Palin constituency. In other words, by providing something to run against, she helps the party become the kind of sensible, pragmatic, problem-focused, grown-up organisation that might actually be worth voting for...

Filed under: 2012 (12 more articles) , GOP (153 more articles) , Palin (41 more articles) , Romney (24 more articles)

Previous Back to Alex Massie Next

Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Melanie Phillips | Coffee House | Faith Based

Actions: Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (17)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Post comment

Sir Graphus

November 17th, 2009 4:46pm Report this comment

“Palin's fund-raising potential”. You see I'm scared again. Bush had fund raising potential. A "wrecker not a uniter"; Bush was a divisive figure too.

Kittler

November 17th, 2009 7:43pm Report this comment

Good God. First Palin the creationist now Romney the Mormon. Believes in the Book of Mormon, translated by Joe Smith from the golden plates which he found and then miraculously and conveniently disappeared.
Thus begins the unbelievable Mormon hokum.

Rhoda Klapp

November 17th, 2009 11:04pm Report this comment

It's not up to me to decide or even complain about the subjects here. But really, two posts about a person who is now a private(ish) citizen running for pres in three years from now? And who she might run against in the primaries? If it's any of the 2008 crowd, forget it for another four years. What got Romney and Huckabee and the rest outvoted in 2008 will still be there in 2012, I think. They did not miss the nomination because the guy who won it was just so unnaturally charismatic, did they?

However, a post about Mr Obama, and Mr Biden, and how well they are doing, with the help of the delightful impish Mrs Clinton, that would be..well..relevant.

Alex Massie

November 17th, 2009 11:22pm Report this comment

Rhoda: Well, sure. But it's not as though I never write about Obama.

And anyway, the shape of the GOP landscape is not a minor thing and since Palin is doing her best to shape that scene it's not irrelevant to consider what that means for the future of the party and, for that matter, the US.

I'd like to see a revivified GOP that is a) sane and b) persuasive. Palin's role in preventing or facilitating this seems something that's worthy of comment.

She's not a private citizen, she's a political celebrity. So, for better or worse, she matters. And, hence, she's worth talking about.

brock

November 17th, 2009 11:47pm Report this comment

I agree more than not. Carry on, Sarah. And Carry on, Obama. Romney in 2012...to erase Obe's 4, Bush's 8, and Clinton's 8.

E-Dawg

November 18th, 2009 12:02am Report this comment

Mitt Romney is the best choice for the GOP and for the US. He's the most qualified person in the whole country to lead it. I agree 100% with your analysis on how Palin's candidacy would serve him.

Maria S.

November 18th, 2009 1:51am Report this comment

I hope it's Romney, if only that were so he could fix the mess Obama is getting us into. I think his mormonism is a plus, they are honest, hardworking people. It doesn't bother me if he believes in angels and gold plates and even a baby being born by a virgin as long as he can fix the government which I believe he can do.

Cameron Franklin

November 18th, 2009 3:44am Report this comment

Romney would be the strongest presidential candidate for the GOP - and the best president! I voted for Obama last year but I'd select Romney in 2012.

Romney 2012!

Ethan

November 18th, 2009 4:23am Report this comment

'There remains the problem of his Mormonism...."

Wow, you could have said there remains the problem of someone being a Jew! Listen to yourself. Is there a difference between being anti-Mormon and ant-Jew? Pray tell...

Since there are more Mormons in the US than Jews now you might want to show some respect.

Citrus

November 18th, 2009 7:30am Report this comment

Romney just seems like the right choice. People attack his faith, but thank God that he is a man of faith. He is not running for Pope. Let's elect the guy with the proven track record (or at least has a track record). My vote is for Romney.

Rhoda Klapp

November 18th, 2009 4:51pm Report this comment

The thing of it is, for 2012, nothing happening right now matters, except democrat performance, and that of Obama. As Incumbent, Obamea is odds-on to win in 2012 anyway. To lose, he has to mess up now. It's probably the economy which may do him in. OK, he could lose by looking powerless to get his bills through. Or he could lose because of the economic effect they will have if he succeeds in getting them through. America is broke, its credit cards are maxed out, and his plan is to push through expensive plans paid for by..borrowed money? Printed money? I don't know. If he hasn't got a grip by 2010 he'll lose the congress, and that is the end of progressive legislation. Maybe he'll run as a victim of the GOP, but that implies a GOP with a lot more cred and power than it has now. If the economy is still on its back, the GOP only has to field some kind of half-decent candidate. If the playing field is level, there is no current republican with half the charisma of an Obama, and he will win no matter who they put up.

So it is Obama's to lose. Always was. The GOP in 2009 just does not matter, just its candidates for 2010.

I truly would like to see a non-partisan summary of where O is now. The stuff I get is all right-wing, and they would have it that he is blowing it big time. Most of the the MSM is still in the tank, and they don't even mention the possibility that things aren't going right.

This week's empty suit cover is good, no?

Patricia Shaw

November 18th, 2009 7:09pm Report this comment

Good for you Massie Man for bothering to talk to those with those who read your blog. Unlike Phillips, who smears whomsoever she pleases, and never dares to come and argue with those who expose her.

Re Palin, she is being groomed for next time round. No doubt about it.

Since that definitive example of the Embalmer's Art, Reagan, corporate republicans have reduced themselves to finding hollowed out figreheads with a common touch. To with Bush. Palin fits that mould brilliantly.

daniel maris

November 18th, 2009 9:04pm Report this comment

I always used to feel a bit sleepy when Mitt Romney made an appearance.

Palin appears authentically American - down to her lack of interest in the rest of the world. I don't think I could vote for any politician who couldn't be bothered to read the newspapers everyday. That's part of the job.

Mike

November 19th, 2009 9:32pm Report this comment

Romney is highly qualified to serve as President of the United States for all American's. Romney / Santorum 2012

Michael

November 21st, 2009 12:01am Report this comment

Mitt Romney's ten times the candidate that the other people you listed are!

Alex

November 22nd, 2009 3:42pm Report this comment

Ethan (November 18th, 2009 4:23am) writes:

**quote**
There remains the problem of his Mormonism...."

Wow, you could have said there remains the problem of someone being a Jew! Listen to yourself. Is there a difference between being anti-Mormon and ant-Jew? Pray tell...

Since there are more Mormons in the US than Jews now you might want to show some respect.
**end-quote**

Respect for what? An exploitative pseudo-religion (with cattle-ranches, a game farm, insurance company, various commercial ventures, 3-billion dollar shopping mall, etc), all founded by an unemployable womanizer and magic-man?

Since belief-systems shape mindset, it is _completely_ legitimate for the US electorate to consider how mormonism defined, and continues to influence Romney, especially since the man is a fully-vested church functionary, having been both a bishop and stake-president.

-----------------

And by the way, attempting to equate criticism of the mormon "church" with anti-semitism is both fatuous and reprehensible ...