Never let it be said that Fred Barnes can’t take the long view. While he concurs, with regret, that Sarah Palin has dashed her chances of winning the Republican nomination in 2012, he still sees a path to the White House for Palin:
Well, sure, in theory this could work! But lots of things can work in theory. In any case, surely she’d be better-placed to win the House seat in 2012 if she had completed her term as governor? Any opponent would be perfectly justified in asking her if she’d actually serve her full term in office if she was elected. Doubtless she would say yes, but she’d have a significant credibility problem.
But there is a way: win Alaska’s lone House seat in 2012 and oust Democratic senator Nick Begich in 2014. A term in the House and another in the Senate–nothing would do more to groom her for the White House than this and transform her into the best Republican candidate for the presidency in, say, 2020, when she’d be 56.
Marbury*, meanwhile, suggests that “This is her least bad option, even if it is a pretty damn awful one.” That’s a mildly contrarian take and it’s true that it’s diconcerting to find oneself on the side of the majority (it doesn’t happen often!) and that this in turn should prompt one to re-examine ones position. But, having done so, her decision to resign her post still makes no sense whatsoever. My old pal Toby Harnden, no-one’s idea of a bleeding-heart liberal bed-wetter, is pretty blunt:
How much more plainly can I put it? In terms of national politics, there’s no there there. The empress has no clothes. And the sooner people realise this, are honest about what the reality is rather than what they want it to be and stop allowing themselves to be taken for a ride the better.