The Essence of Palinism

KT everytime

It's not inconceivable that if the Obama desperation experiment fails - ie. he wasn't really the son of a god somewhere come to save us all - down home, mom, country & apple pie appeal of SP may have a chance. Plus like it or not she is a good looking woman which always gets more votes than it loses.

call me dave

Judge Palin by her enemies.

She seems to have all the right ones and she freaks them out.

Dave B

I agree entirely with snowman.

The petty hate that Mrs Palin brings out in commentators is bizarre, but it reflects badly on them, not her.

The best piece I ever read about the press' treatment of Mrs Palen came from Gerald Baker of The Times in 2008:

" It's hard to make a reasoned and fair judgment about the Alaska Governor because she has been the victim of one of the nastiest, most sustained and comprehensive slime-jobs ever performed by a hyper-partisan national and global media."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/article5003165.ece

DavidDP

Pointing out that she's an awful choice for high office and why isn't hate.

Alex is right - even if you revel in the reactions she provokes, that is not a qualification for the position of President.

David Galea

"Alex is right - even if you revel in the reactions she provokes, that is not a qualification for the position of President."

Right. She'd be better off as vice-President, protecting the USA from destructive leftie social attitudes while allowing a boring old white man President to sort out the economic and foreign problems. Shame that McCain's weakness was the economy...

ndm

Finally, the people exasperated by Palin* are not, in my experience, Democrats; rather they're Republicans who wonder why their party has lost its mind and now thinks that her brand of politics - based on rabble-rousing and, it must be said, genuine ignorance - is part of any long-term way forward for the party.

Absolutely. Just look at the coverage on Josh Marshall's TPM Empire. She doesn't drive anyone there nuts. She is a regarded as easy blogging fodder because she makes so many gaffes and finds reality hard to remember. They just view her as a celebrity - a Paris Hilton without the brains.

DavidDP

"She'd be better off as vice-President,"

Lord no - there would be a risk she'd become President. Fox TV presenter seems about her level.

David Galea

Palin represents American social conservatism pretty well. That's the basis of her popularity. The left don't value that but the right do. Does it matter that she's not the one to save the economy and deal with foreign wars when there are experienced old men who can handle those specific tasks? People see her as a celebrity and she is, and as vice-president she could fill the role of head of state rather than head of government, an unpretentious symbol of social and moral conservatism that blocks lefties from imposing weird versions of the family on the USA. You don't need to be a genius to champion the family and stand against conveyorbelt abortion etc, and that role is of huge value to the USA, seeing as the family is probably the most required basis for a strong country. Palin could be the Queen of social conservatism from a Fox television station, but seeing her as vice president, the liberal lefties would get the undeniable message that they can't destroy the USA's family unit.

porkbelly

Perhaps you could enlighten us - exactly which Republican political or opinion leaders are championing her as the next President? Surely this cannot be another case of swinging at strawmen?

ndm

-- Perhaps you could enlighten us - exactly which Republican political or opinion leaders are championing her as the next President?

She appears to be particularly adored by neo-conservative magazines like The Weekly Standard and Commentary. (There is probably a parody of a Woody Allen joke in there to the effect that they should merge and become the Weekly Crap.) Presumably, the writers there believe she is sufficiently dimwitted that, as President, she would be taken in by, support, and implement their pathetic and discredited philosophy.

David Lindsay

Since we can dismiss out of hand the idea of Clinton as the nominee, who is going to be the Democratic nominee if not Obama? (In fact, any serious white challenge would provoke race riots; that is just the way it is.) And whom would the Republican grass roots tolerate as the nominee if not Palin?

So there you have it: the 2012 contest. A man who knows all about the wider world, and therefore wants to keep out of it. And a woman who knows nothing about the wider world, and therefore wants to keep out of it. Either way, a President eschewing foreign entanglements.

A worthy successor to Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Bush the Elder, and even Bush the Younger when he withdrew American troops from Saudi Arabia, the only conservative thing that he ever did. A once-and-for-all break with everything else that Dubya did, all of which Clinton either would have done or did in fact do. The tragic lost years of 1993 to 2009 finally put into the past.

Palin would be an awful President. But that isn’t going to happen. And even if it did, she wouldn’t be an absolutely horrendous one like the politically indistinguishable Clinton and Dubya. She’s stupid. But she’s not wicked, like Clinton. Nor is she stupid and wicked at the same time, like Dubya, or Tony Blair.

Unlike the neocons, Palin spent the Clinton years campaigning for what are contemptuously dismissed as “protectionism”, “isolationism” and “nativism”, as well as traditional family values. More recent events have proved that those for whom she was campaigning were essentially correct while the neocons, intellectuals in their own right, were spectacularly wrong.

Obama, of course, also opposed all the “free” trade rubbish and the wars. His black base is as strongly committed as anyone to proper immigration controls and to English as the national language. And like that base, he, too, defines marriage as only ever the union of one man and one woman, as well as supporting a highly proactive abortion reduction measure currently before Congress thanks to a Democratic Senator who endorsed him against Hillary.

Roll on 2012.

Beefeater

Why do you imagine that "Palinism" - even if it were about style and sentiment - could not win? Analogizing Palin's winnability to Michael Moore's forgets that she has already won elections. And Al Franken, the clown, albeit unfunny, also won an election.

Why is Palinism not about a Republicanism that can win? The Commentary article ndm links to - perhaps he did not read it carefully enough - offers some insights.

Why should Republicanism be about more than mere "style and sentiment" than is Democratism in order to win? I grant you, opposing cool divinity with shuffling collegiality did not win for the Republicans last go round. "Winability", like "electabiltiy", is only known in hindsight.

What is Presidential politics about beyond style and sentiment? Upon what other than s and s did Obama win?

ndm

Beefeater writes:

-- The Commentary article ndm links to - perhaps he did not read it carefully enough - offers some insights.

I have not read the Rubin article I merely put it forward as an example of high-profile Republican thought regarding Palin. In fact, I have no intention of reading the article given the hammering it has been given by serveral reputable commentators. Andrew Sullivan, for example, introduced his response to Rubin with:

-- I worry about elements of proto-fascism becoming mainstream in the GOP.

and continued:

-- But there is something particularly disturbing about the way in which neoconservatives, in their alliance with the Christianist heartland, increasingly argue for a strong and unchecked charismatic leader in the Palin/Bush mold, a disdain for reason in political life and a yearning for what Rubin calls an "instinctual skill set" in a leader. You can see why Leo Strauss, the neocon mentor, backed Mussolini at the beginning.

Ouch.

ndm

Beefeater asks:

-- Upon what other than [style] and [substance] did Obama win?

Intellectual ability, demonstrated competence, and political skill. None of which Sarah Palin possesses. Yes, she can gain the support of neoconservative intellectuals and some portion of the Republican Base - but neither are sufficient to win a Presidential election.

At this point, she is not a politician but a celebrity. She uses the threat of running for the Presidency the same way so many other retired politicians have in the past - as a way to appear serious and politically relevant. She would be crushed by her opponents in a Republican primary - where her refusal to undertake any serious interview would be exploited as cowardice by her opponents. Far better, therefore, to leave the threat of running hanging out there as long as possible - thereby increasing her marketability to the small percentage of the electorate which watches Fox News.

Pot Head

With the right it would appear it's all about the messenger never mind the facts: Matthew D'Ancona said this about AGW in GQ

"It's the sanctimonious style of the green lobby and their ministerial accomplices I cannot stand: the collective smugness that comes with absolute the collective smugness that comes with absolute moral certainty of any sort and the and the readiness to disdain
and scorn anyone who dares to dissent, even slightly, from any aspect of the new orthodoxy."

Not really so far away from Snowmans comments.

Geoff Miller

Every time I read something like this it heartens me.

Snowman was right - Palin freaks liberals out.

You constantly pick over her record but when compared to Obama she has more experience. Obama also comes out of Chicago politics - the most corrupt in America and is very close to some very shady people like Rev. Wright.

His election was a marketing campaine - he was an "acceptable" black mouthing platitudes - he was, and I emphasise WAS, America's comfort blanket.

The reality is proving to be less comforting.

Given that Palin was going for Vice President the ire of Liberals is even more satisfying - and shows how scared they are of a popular politicians who appeals across the political divide. If you are looking for a joke politician then look at who Palin ran against - Biden. Now he really is a joke!

As for rabble rousing - do you not think the "rabble". i.e. regular people, should have a vote, a say, in their own democracy?

Increasingly, here and in America, Liberalism is shorthand for undemocratic, corrupt, bullying Marxism.

DavidDP

"shows how scared they are of a popular politicians who appeals across the political divide."

Well, any party would be worried if their opponents managed upon this holy grail. Reagan did it magnificently for example. Palin though manifestly does not reach across political divides.

Rhoda Klapp

Yeah, everything is right with american politics apart from this stupid interfering nonsensical woman, and her evil populism.

She only gets a look-in because of corruption, pork, insiderism, elitism and the subversion of constitutional practice by the federal government and a rigged partisan (both ways)Supreme court. Fix those things, and Palin will have no basis. Fail to fix them, and it doesn't matter anyway.

Conservative Cabbie

ndm

Thanks for the giggle to brighten up my monday morning.

"I have no intention of reading the article given the hammering it has been given by serveral reputable commentators. Andrew Sullivan, for example,"

The obsessive birther who thinks that McCains nomination of Palin was "almost criminal" and who, despite all evidence to the contrary, thinks Palin will lead America on a route to fascism.

Go on, admit it, your reference to Sullivan as reputable when it comes to Palin was a joke wasn't it?

If you agree with sullivan that Palin is a proto-fascist, as i presume you do, then how about backing that up with evidence. Or are you just going to repeat Sullivan/TPM/Balloon Juice talking points without anything to support it?

There is nothing Palin has said or done that would support such a claim. This is just yet more evidence of the left being entirely bereft of anything resembling intelligent arguments. To them, as we are seeing in Massachusetts, the left wing argument boils down to calling people "birthers", "extremists", "deniers", "tea-baggers" or "fascists". That's it. That's all they've got.

Conservative Cabbie

Alex

"as it became obvious that she wasn't up to the job"

Perhaps you'd like to define "the job". I think it's getting closer to a consensus that to date Obama has failed at "the job" in his first year. So what is it about the job that Palin would have done worse than Obama? And citing a couple of bad interviews isn't going to cut it because they say nothing about her decision making abilities, her willingness to work with the opposition (a willingness Obama clearly lacks), the people she chooses to advise her or her ability to stand up to her own party.

There is a case to be made for Palin being a successful executive in her time in Alaska and she's undoubtedly a very skilled politician. I've yet to see a substantive argument for her to be a failure at the Presidential level.

Ronnie

Yip, Rhoda's right again. Palin is the product of a political system that ran off the rails a long time ago. I'm sure that even the Conservative base would prefer not to be represented by a moron, if they had any genuine choice in the matter.

Conservative Cabbie

Alex

Nothing on Massachusetts or are you waiting for after the vote? I'd be interested to see your take on events there. Is the Democratic meltdown only down to what might turn out to be the worst campaign ever (said for effect) or is it a local example of a bigger picture?

And as a baseball fan, you must have enjoyed the Curt Schilling is a yankee fan quote from Coakley.

THX1138

I'm reading "Race of A Lifetime" and you wanna see what her own side had to say about her. And it's not pretty.

Rhoda Klapp

Her side? Well, it isn't the republican establishment. It's not entirely correct to see Palin as part of the two-party football team tribal conflict. She's more of a symbol of political class versus we the people. Or as I like to term it, Eloi versus Morlock. That's why she polarizes thwe rest of us. Alex

THX1138

Rhoda I meant "her side" as in those staffers working on the McCain Palin campaign for the Presidency. I'm not sure they represent the Republican establishment, wasn't McCain supposed to be the maverick candidate.

It appears that from Wasilla to the McCain campaign anyone who sees Lady Gaga up close has similar stories to tell of massive ego, petiness, vindictiveness, vanity and stupidity.. I can't think of a worse or more dangerous set of traits in a leader.. But I still want her to run in 2012, just for the sheer fun of it all.

Snowman

Alex: The unhappiness of the GOP leadership shouldn’t worry. Not unlike in our corner here, the two key political cousins over the water have been affected by the corrosive taste of power to an equal degree, and play the game to mutually agreed rules. The masses have a soul of their own, so who knows, she’s only in her forties, and people even of the unwashed phylum are known to learn. If Marx got anything right, then it will again be the masses that will mould the history, she will furnish but a conduit.

Rhoda Klapp @ 10.27: Paradoxically perhaps, as an antidote to Obama, the pinnacle of the pseudo-liberal take on life, she appears to many (not to you, of course) to have lifted the near dormant spirit of the old America. The country that used to go for wealth creation rather than bickering about the spoils of the diminishing endeavours in the courts, whose believe system morphed from the John Wayne roughness to the brutality of the Wire and stuff like that. On the other hand, she may be the last gasp of the same spirit before America surrenders the leadership to the emerging might of the Red coloured giant of the East. Time will tell.

and another, more serious thing: she scores top on the one feminine attribute for which men could kill. Just imagine her alongside our recently elevated Lady of Brussels. On par on intellect, but on sexiness, no contest.

Rhoda Klapp

Snowman, unfortunately my last post was cut off (maybe by my own fat fingers) before I could finish. In the conflict between the Eloi (Massie, THX, Obama, Kerry, Pelosi, Reid, McCain and all the rest) and the Morlocks, such as the people in the US who do the work and pay the taxes, but are looked down upon, especially if they live in the flyover states, I am a Morlock every time. The references to Palin's stupidity etc were ironic. I don't think she's stupid, I don't think I'm so much better and cleverer than she. Neither do I think the GOP as it is now could survive another candidacy on her part. Maybe a new, different GOP, but it is stuffed to the gills with time-servers and special interests (just like the dems) and would not get behind her, save with a knife already drawn.

Snowman

Rhoda Klapp @ 7.05:

my sincere apologies. I too have a membership card of the Morlock phylum. Let’s continue hitting them hard, my friend.

Sir Graphus

Palinism, like Bushism, is, when presented with a world of complexity they are too stupid to get to grips with, to insist that it conforms to their own narrow understanding.

Sir Graphus

... then pursue policies according to that narrow understanding, then be surprised when the outcome is unexpected.

Gene Carr

No one who has examined Governor Palin's actual record of achievement in the offices that she held could possible call her stupid. In the first 18 months of her governorship of Alaska she achieved more that a bungling and corrupt amateur like Barrack Obama had achieved in his entire career. Palin is also a self made woman. seriously wouls we have ever heard of a mediocrity like Hillary Clinton if she had not been married to Bill.

Does the so-called 'mainstream' media, which is soaked in sectarian liberalism ever take the trouble to ask why someone they depict as 'right wing' could get elected in a state where a relatively high number of voters (43%) are independents, and where her most bitter critics and opponents are on the Right not the Left. Can nayone explain how this 'divisive' person managed to secure the almost unanimous bispartissan support in the Alaskan legislature for her major legislative initiatives? Can anyone explain how this allegedly 'fundamentalist' Christian got elected and retained very high approval ratings in a State, which according to Gallup is among the most secular and libertaian in the US? And can anyone tell me why this religious 'fundamentalist' vetoed attempts by the Alaskan legislature to rescind the rights of gay couples in Alaska and why one of the leading Gay blog of Chicago (Hillbuz) strongly supports her? I

Isn't it time that many if not a maority of mainstream journalists began to do the job they are paid to do?