Longer version cross-posted at Huffington Post.
The first to benefit from the Hillary effect, Sarah Palin is asserting her prowess in 2010 like no other female has done in political history. Her politics are not mine, but credit is due. The void created by Hillary’s historic presidential run, at a time when Sarah made her own history on the right by being the first Republican female on a national ticket, has been filled by an avalanche of women, several of whom on the right have been encouraged and endorsed by Sarah. That she’s leading the Tea Party faction inside the GOP at a time when the Republican brand has crashed works in her favor, no matter what Democrats say. Oh, and remember that George W. Bush beat Gore and Kerry. Besides, it’s not like the Smart Set in Washington is winning raves.
Read John Ellis, everybody else is.
[...] “She’s too stupid” is what the Establishment GOP really thinks about Sarah Palin. “Good-looking,” but a “ditz.” This is unfertile ground, since Palin can turn the argument on a dime and say: “They drive the country into bankruptcy, they underwrite Fannie and Freddie, they bail out Goldman Sachs, they fight wars they don’t want to win, they say enforcing the immigration laws is silly and they call me stupid! I’ll give you a choice: you can have their smarts or my stupidity, which one do you want?” A large number of GOP presidential primary voters will take Palin’s “stupidity” in a heartbeat.
What this means is two things: (1) the pressure on former Florida Governor Jeb Bush to run for the GOP presidential nomination will increase as the year moves along, and (2) the likelihood of a strong independent party candidacy increases as Palin’s support within the GOP broadens. Oh, and it also means one other thing: President Obama is not doomed. – John Ellis
Andrew Sullivan, perpetual Hillary hater and Palin conspiracy theorist, writes about this today; at least he understands Palin’s power, which is more than I can say for most, especially on the left. Interesting that career Hillary hater Chris Matthews gets what’s possible for Sarah, too. In the post-Hillary political era, it seems some men have finally awakened.
As regulars know, I’ve been writing about Sarah’s rise for over a year.
Sarah Palin is the first to benefit from the Hillary effect, which has caused a ripple in the conservative movement and beyond. Not bad having five governors who have a good shot at winning in November, with Congress certainly to tilt towards Republicans whether Democrats retain control or not. If Meg Whitman wins in California it could become Obama’s first nightmare looking to 2012. Call it a slow walk or a steady drum beat that’s getting louder, but during 2010 Sarah Palin has shown why her plan to bail on Alaska and turn the heat up in the lower 48 was the best move for her. It’s also been very good for Republicans, particularly conservative “mama grizzlies,” who are her prime target, along with the military, which has always been the first mention out of her mouth in any event.
In an Iowa poll released last month, Mitt came in at 62% (and is still one to watch), with Sarah at 58%, Newt next, but it’s not even begun, with the “mama grizzlies” just getting organized. In South Carolina, Mitt might have given Nikki Haley the nod first, but it was Sarah’s star power who brought in the klieg lights to lift her up.
In the post-Hillary political era, women are rising. Sarah’s the first to fill that void and her instincts have been dead on since she took to Facebook and wrote about “death panels” taking Democrats off message and igniting the tea partiers, but also when she left Alaska behind to take on 2010. No one knows where she’ll end up, especially since Palin hasn’t proved she can widen her support beyond her own choir, which she must do to be president.
However, way too many people are forgetting that that doesn’t matter in the Republican nomination process. A good portion of primary voters are her choir.
Sarah Palin’s just getting started.
But remember, Barack Obama is a formidable opponent. He beat Hillary Rodham Clinton, so whoever shows up for 2012, they’ll be in for the fight of their life. So while betting against Obama may be popular with some right now, it will take a lot more than what the right is offering now to get the job done.
There’s something about Sarah Palin that makes me incapable of being objective no matter how I try. I find the whole “ditz” aspect to be off-putting, I found her lack of knowledge in the 2008 election about every conceivable political subject, both foreign and domestic, to be embarrassing and I guess as a result, I kind of think she’s just another right wing loud-mouth that just spits out the right wing talking points in environments where she will never have to be challenged- stump speeches, right wing radio, Facebook and Twitter etc. and as a result, I have little respect for her. She was foisted out of obscurity due to a cynical political strategy which tried to play (perhaps somewhat successfully) on Hillary losing the nomination, as if McCain could simply pick up every single woman who voted for Hillary simply because Sarah has a vagina. The fact that she knew nothing about anything or that she might actually one day end up being POTUS if something happened to McCain, didn’t seem to matter to the conservatives. In fact, people like Bill Kristol and other neocons seem to be of the view that the more of an empty slate someone is (see George W. Bush), the more they can control policy at the highest levels (see Iraq). She now has enough money to purchase the best neocon advisers and every time she speaks, she does little other than spew their silly talking points. In other words, she continues to think that facts don’t matter and bettering herself with ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE is less important than being the Tea Party poster girl. She spews the usual garbage about terrorists, faux patriotism, war, socialism and the non-existent liberal media conspiracy which is to blame for all of her personal failings (particularly her lack of knowledge about basic, simple subjects). I find her to be sarcastic in a rather mean-spirited way, and despite the supposed strength that so many observers seem to see in her, she incessantly needs to play the victim- she takes no responsibility for anything- all her perceived failings are the result of the liberal elite media conspiracy. I find that whole meme to be overused, tedious and a fundamental weakness. She also seems to back candidates once it becomes clear they will likely win which would seem to demonstrate to me that perhaps she isn’t God’s gift every Republican candidate out there.
I “get” that she’s a phenomenon but I feel like that says less about her (see above) than about us- by “us” I mean the political electorate in the US.
I hesitate to go here, but I will- some think that Sarah Palin is very attractive- many in the media often remark on it as do many male conservatives. Personally, she’s not my type but to each his/her own. The constant comments about her appearance reinforce that where women in politics are concerned, that still matters but it also makes me wonder if Sarah were, say, 200 lbs and not considered attractive, would she have been able to market herself the way she has? Again, I think a lot of the Sarah Palin phenomenon says less about her (because I find “her” to be pretty short on substance) and more about us. And not necessarily in a good way.
I think the most fitting part of the 2008 campaign was when McCain turned the lights off on her as she took the stage at his concession speech.
…and then when McCain ran into trouble trying to get re-elected against Tea Party opponent JD Hayworth he had Sarah come in to headline an event & bring supporters in.
Karma is a bitch.
Hi SCB. Great comment and I’m glad you went on and expounded. Love reading what everyone has to say about her.
Do you think the same way about the incompetent, condescending idiot that is currently in the White House? A lot of people think Obama is attractive. If he were 300 pounds and not considered attractive, would he have been able to market himself? Would his political machine have been so quick to propel him in to the WH?
I had previously been unaware of the term “Hillary Effect”; the philosophy that Sec. Clinton’s high profile primary campaign made it easier for women to enter the political arena.
This effect may be a reality, unlike the disproven Bradley Effect from which it apparently takes its name.
However, I do not believe it applies to Sarah Palin on any level.
Sarah Palin was already in office at the time of Clinton’s primary run, and was pulled from obscurity in a cynical and failed ploy to peel off women voters from President Obama. These other women you note are entering a greater political arena _after_ Hillary Clinton on their own merits, and therefore could be the beneficiary of any effect.
You are correct in that Sarah Palin has been effective as a bomb thrower, but she comes in a long line of Republican pretty faces who have done the same for the GOP in the media. Ann Covlter drove liberals nuts for years through books, and now Sarah Palin is doing the same through a phony quasi-campaign.
Yes, Sarah Palin was technically a politician. She won the Alaska governorship on her own merits (but was selected for the national stage for her gender). But we have many quasi-politician men on the right (and left) throwing bombs at the other side.
At some point, someone may convince this poor woman that she is more than the latest incarnation of the pretty face female Republican flame thrower because she was a half term governor of a small state. Flame throwers don’t make national candidates, though, and we see evidence for this time and again. For 18 months, she has been unable to expand her base of support, and is as toxic as ever.
I couldn’t find anything more recent, but from February 2010:
“An overwhelming number of Americans are seriously ticked off at their government but that anger isn’t driving them into the arms of Sarah Palin, according to a Washington Post/ABC News poll. A full 71% of voters—including a majority of Republicans—feel that Palin is unqualified to be president. Only 37% have favorable views of Palin, the poll found.”
Read more: http://www.newser.com/story/80636/fed-up-americans-not-wowed-by-sarah-palin-poll.html#ixzz0tI0yp6DX
With a profile as high as Sarah Palin’s, with so many gaffes and incendiary remarks, her fate is already sealed.
Ah, such a short memory.
Sarah Palin was picked for veep, because the Hillary effect had begun the moment she lost the nomination.
As for her “fate sealed,” I don’t do predictions, I simply analyze the political turf. So you may end up being right, because Palin certainly has to expand her supporter base to become president.
But George W. Bush won 2 terms.
Palin only has to win the Republican nomination to make history in a big way. Remember who votes in these primaries.
My understanding is that the Hillary Effect refers to political achievements by women as a result of Sec. Clinton’s groundbreaking Presidential campaign.
I feel you are conflating achievement with selection, and a deeply cynical and sexist selection at that.
While Sarah Palin did achieve in her own right, it was before Sec. Clinton. And after the campaign, all Palin has done is work backwards, first being a quitter and then radicalizing to make her unelectable.
You might say that she has succeeded financially and garnered attention in her current role as a political operative/hatchetwoman, but women have been doing that long before even Geraldine Ferraro.
I feel for the Hillary Effect to apply to Sarah Palin, she has to achieve political success in her own right after the Clinton campaign concluded.
the country thought it wanted change.
what it really wanted is reform from bushes abuses.
they thought they could get it from obama but he has been a disaster and more of the same.
sarah offers reform. she fought both parties in alaska and won.
when the reform hungry country gets a whiff of what she is offering they will jump at the chance to roll back some of the biggest abuses of power we have seen yet. both sides have now abused the public and the public is now hungry for what sarah offers the chance to obtain.
all she has to do is develop her image in the right direction and she is a shoe in for president.
my opinion….
One thing though- she seems to really turn off moderates, independents and of course liberals. How does anybody win the presidency if they can’t get those groups?
While many seem to think she’s an obvious republican contender for POTUS, the comments she makes sure don’t help. While her inflammatory rhetoric rallies the people who think Obama is a socialist (or communist), much of what she is saying will rightfully be used against her in any future campaign. She sounds more like a right wing talk radio host than a viable contender for POTUS. If she’s Presidential material, then I guess so is Glenn Beck, who spouts the exact same factually-impaired, inflammatory rhetoric.
Also, if she runs for POTUS, she can’t just hide behind Fox News, Facebook and Twitter. She learned the hard way that at times the media and the blogosphere do things like fact-check (you know, death panels, the Road to Nowhere, etc.) and she doesn’t do well when she has to act like a reasonable, thoughtful, knowledgeable person.
She seems very happy to continue doing what she’s doing- to make buckets of money and be politically influential in a way that doesn’t require her to a) actually demonstrate knowledge of anything and b) require her to be accountable for some of her statements, preferring instead to promote herself via Facebook and Twitter.
Perhaps someone who supports Palin or who sees her as a viable leader of this country, could attempt to argue what exactly about Sarah Palin makes her a true leader and by leader I don’t mean in the Glenn Beck sort of way, I mean in the Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, JFK sort of way- I don’t care whether people like any of the above, and they certainly all had major flaws, but they seemed to be able to demonstrate a certain knowledge and conviction that made many see them as true leaders, irrespective of ideology. What is it about Sarah Palin, other than her popularity, that makes her someone that has great leadership potential? You know, the sort of character we would want in the WH if nuclear war broke out or to deal with an economic catastrophe. Does Mama Grizzly have anything other than sarcastic, biting rhetoric or do we just accept that she would be the POTUS in name only, while her bevy of political aides would be the real leaders of the country, similar to GWB?
I hope the left keep underestimating her. All I ever hear from this site, except from Taylor occasionally, is how stupid she is.
***TM: But remember, Barack Obama is a formidable opponent. He beat Hillary Rodham Clinton, so whoever shows up for 2012, they’ll be in for the fight of their life. So while betting against Obama may be popular with some right now, it will take a lot more than what the right is offering now to get the job done.***
A formidable opponent eh? No one buys his spiel anymore, Taylor.
You talk about the halcyon days BEFORE Obama revealed himself to be the timid and naïve person that he is. Even diehard liberals are deeply disappointed with this man now because he has wasted so much. Now our eyes are opened. We know the real Obama. And he’s weak. At least, not a strong leader.
Some will say there have been accomplishments, but at the same time there have been too many unnecessary compromises and outright lies. Sure people have short memories but do you think we can forget the backroom deals with big insurance as the public option was sold out; the callous repudiation of his pledge to prochoice voters to “make preserving women’s rights under Roe v. Wade a priority as president. The unions were among his dedicated foot soldiers. They are still waiting for him to keep his pledge “to fight for the passage of the Employee Free Choice Act.” Not to mention DADT and the environmentalists. The only people to whom it seems he hasn’t lied to were the Republicans.
In spite of his enormous resources he is not clever enough, ruthless enough to even control the message. The right controls the message. Since there is no sign of even the slightest awareness of the problem at the WH, it MAY be too late to reinvent their image. They naively painted themselves into this namby-pamby bipartisanship corner now they have to live with it.
I do not care how hard he “fights” if he can fight, it will take a lot more than Obama’s words now to get the job done.
“You talk about the halcyon days BEFORE Obama revealed himself to be the timid and naïve person that he is. “-Ramsgate
Your making the same mistake others did leading up to the primaries. Everyone including many in Hillary camp thought no one in America would cast one vote for this man. Heck, I was so sure Hillary could take Obama out too…But guess what he turned out to be a ruthless campaigner…and won. George Bush was an aggressive campaign who beat Gore and Kerry. Remember Bush made a horrible president but won twice. It all comes to getting out vote. Obama has a hard core base of supports that will never leave him…I’ve met many of these folks…ugh!
Don’t let your pure hatred of all things Obama blind you of the fact he will do and say whatever it takes to hold on to the White House. So, yes Obama will not go down easy in 2012. Many thought Bush would lose in 2004…surprise he didn’t. Your same thing people assumed about Bill Clinton during his first term. I remember Republicans were gloating how he was finished…Bill Clinton went on to win a second term.
Never count Obama out…I no longer do!!!
The thought of Obama getting a seond term scares the living hell out of me. Keeps me up at nights.
Hearing you say that actually makes me feel good. If republicans are terrified, Obama is doing the right thing.
LOL
Then what should keep you up at nights is that I AM A DEMOCRAT!!!
No, you just think you’re a democrat.
It’s not like we’re an exclusive club or anything. The tent is pretty big.
But you’re for a diminished role of government, and that is thankfully squarely outside the democratic party.
I think you need a 12-step program to admit that you are a Republican. The first step is admitting you have a problem.
I hope you are kidding when you say that Nfs. Surely, you jest, remember the BP spill?????
Marie205 says:
10 July 2010 at 12:26 pm
***Your making the same mistake others did leading up to the primaries. Everyone including many in Hillary camp thought no one in America would cast one vote for this man. Heck, I was so sure Hillary could take Obama out too***
Marie205, generally I agree with your postings but here I disagree.
No mistake at all. Although I was partial to Hillary during the primaries I knew that Mark Penn’s complacent strategy was all wrong AND that she would have hell to pay for her Iraq vote. They initially thought they could coast to victory as they completely underestimated Obama’s change message. They also thought that the way to win was to be the Democratic (sensible) alternative to Bush, while Obama was presenting himself as a complete break with the way things were done in the past. If there was a mistake that was it, in that, that is what some of us were hearing.
I don’t know what you mean by “ruthless” campaigner. Ruthless is not a word I would associate with Barak Obama. Tireless, yes.
I would not ascribe terms such as bold, brazen, courageous, passionate, gutsy, etc to him either. This is a timid and cautious man who is constantly seeking the middle way to avoid conflict.
You mentioned Bush winning two terms. Both his elections were contested remember? Florida and Ohio. Gore & Kerry. IMO, both of these men were insufficiently ruthless. Both gave up without a fight. A Republican would never have done that. Do you believe Obama would behave any differently from the way the other two Democrats behaved?
Anyway, all this is not to say that he cannot possibly be reelected as the Republicans seem to be in their own death spiral. But it’s not because he’s a brilliant tactician or because he’s a ruthless campaigner. People will be begging him to fight back as they always beg their Democratic candidates to do.
IMO if he wins it may be because of Republican extremism or incompetence. I just don’t see any strategic or tactical brilliance or toughness coming from Obama or the people around him. And I have no idea why people are still waiting for this second resurgence.
I know I’ve said this a thousand times Ramsgate but I just don’t get how someone so smart can be making such obvious mistakes at this stage of the game. And while I understand that Presidents have to compromise and that they can never please all of their supporters, it seems like Obama has suddenly lost the ability to do what he did best during 2008, which is control his message and to follow through.
I think Obama signaled right from the beginning that he was no progressive and that “change” wasn’t really a priority- he put us on notice by making Rahm his CoS, by placing Geithner and Summers in such important positions visa vi the economy, by elevating the status quo-enabling Dennis Ross to help craft mideast and Iran policies, by placing the pro-industry Ken Salazar as head of the Dept. of Interior, etc.
In other words, I think many people were ignoring all the signs.
The big question though is how can the GOP actually be winning the war of words regarding painting Obama as some ultra-liberal socialist? Because of a bloated deficit that was initiated and made worse by Bush? Because of health reform which automatically provides private insurers approx. 30 million new members and the signing of which caused health insurance stock to go through the roof? I don’t get it. The right wing rhetoric and the facts just don’t add up. I guess the media never bothering to fact-check helps the GOP a great deal.
Obama like to campaign… He doesn’t like to actually do the hard work of being POTUS. He is always in his element when he is in front of swooning crowds chanting for him. I think it is like a drug/addiction for him. I really don’t think he likes being POTUS… just the glory of being POTUS.
It is amazing, though, how the right is painting him to be something he’s not… and controlling the message.
Exactly- he can’t be both a far lefty (per the right) and yet have the progressive base mad as hell at him. You would think that at the very least the media might explore this inconsistency further instead of just repeating the GOP talking points about Obama being the most radically liberal POTUS ever. And don’t they say that about any Democrat? I mean lets be honest, he’s no FDR. Unfortunately.
“He’s no FDR.” What an elegant understatement.
“The big question though is how can the GOP actually be winning the war of words regarding painting Obama as some ultra-liberal socialist? “-secyclintonblog
Easy answer…FEAR OF THE OTHER. Fox News has run a 24/7 hit campaign on this guy. When they report information on this President they always use negative points. He has done good in certain areas but the media lead by Fox only report the bad stuff…lol
Obama communication team fell down hard on the job. Bill Clinton made sure to remind people constantly in the media of all the good he was doing while in the White House. Obama people leaves this info up to bullet points on the White House web page.
I think you give Faux too much credit. Only 2.2 million people watch each night, roughly the same number of people who watch John Stewart.
The media was very different during Bill Clinton’s Presidency. It was far more liberal. In fact, Faux arose after his reelection because CNN was derided as being too liberal.
Faux is just a business. And the primary consumers of cable news have become middle-aged and elderly Caucasians, a heavily conservative demographic. They are just catering to the audience. In fact, the primary consumers of media are conservatives.
The problem in America is a corporate media that needs to be in business. There used to be a day where journalism was the consumed product. Now it’s entertainment.
If Faux only sold journalism, they would be out of business.
Completely agree..
secyclintonblog says:
10 July 2010 at 12:28 pm
***The big question though is how can the GOP actually be winning the war of words regarding painting Obama as some ultra-liberal socialist? Because of a bloated deficit that was initiated and made worse by Bush?****
I genuinely believed that Obama was experienced & seasoned enough to understand that if one is to be successful in an environment such as Washington D.C., one must first and foremost control the message. He had an opportunity to control the FCC and to tame FOX NEWS and to restructure the corporate media. Even before he entered the Oval Office, Drudge, Limbaugh and Hannity were all in a panic and sending out warning signs about the Fairness Doctrine, forcing him to swear that he’s not going to initiate it.
The man didn’t have a vision; he didn’t have a plan. And so nothing has changed. It’s business as usual under Obama, the MSM is free to carry on with their lies as usual representing their corporate masters.
The ONLY thing he destroyed was ACORN, which is something he should have held to reinforce and strengthen his base.
Sarah Palin couldn’t find her way out of the men’s room without being led by the hand. There’s an old Hollywood saying “Say whatever you want about me in the press. Just spell my name correctly.” Plus it’s summertime and the public is looking for titillation. Sarah is titillizing on so many levels. Hell, I’m feeling down right titillized thinking about her while I’m writing this. For those who just can’t get enough of Sarah, Christian book publisher Zondervan is putting out a biography of her in September. It’s written for 9 to 12 year olds so it should be a best seller in no time. Peace
Hah.
You are a fool.
Well, you’re a Republican. I’ll take Imhotep and his often incoherent ramblings any day over your politics that led this country into this mess.
I am a Democrat. Imhotep is a professed anarchist. Take your choice.
Taylor, is right…many pundits and Obama haters keep assuming he is finished. These same geniuses screamed Bush & Clinton would not win a second term. Anyway, I no longer trust what the media says and just follow my gut instinct….and it is telling me Obama will run an extremely aggressive campaign against his opponent.
His critics are right about one thing he will be much more weakened in 2012…but must Presidents are no longer at their full strength going into a second term. So, Obama will just have to work harder and do what he does best find new voters 2012.
Sarah Palin has her strengths in the fact she is likable ( When not trashing the President of the United States) and gifted with a good shrewd sense in picking her goals. Ms. Palin plans to be the First Woman President….she knows that the time is right for another run by a woman candidate. Look for her campaign to accuse Obama camp of sexism often…it’ll help her win more female support against the guy that beat Hillary. Sarah will work hard had bringing down Obama she sees him as an obstacle to her dream.
And he sees Ms. Palin has a lightweight…so, it maybe a fun general election in 2012 to watch Obama vs. Palin.
Her dream? It has always been Obama’s dream from the time he was a kid…to be a ruler. I doubt very much this is a dream for her. This is her calling, not a self-absorbed dream, like Obama’s dream.
Nothing wrong with her dream. She would make a great President. She is not afraid of anything and lets the crap the left spews at her roll off her back. She is sure of herself and confident. She doesn’t owe anyone anything. She is very intelligent and has great instincts. Too bad she is not in charge, now, she could put the country back on the Right track.
She would have kicked BP’s as- the very next day after that oil rig blew.
My two cents…
Obama will easily win a second term. Most voters don’t pay attention to issues like we on this board do. Most voters will vote for whom they like. Obama still has the youth and now he has those who were 14, 15, 16, 17… who could’t vote for his 1st term but idolized him anyway… went to rallies to swoon for “words…just words..” and “Yes we can”. This is powerful stuff for our youth. My youngest stepson is one of them. He can’t imagine not being able to vote for Obama in the next presidential election. And my oldest stepson, who did vote Obama, will again. They just don’t pay attention… more concerned with graduating from college (a good thing!) their social life..and girls. But they’ll get caught up in the moment for the next election.. especially here in Oregon as it takes little effort to vote as we do it by mail. They’ll get behind Obama and his “coolness”… never behind Palin (or anyone else for that matter).
They’re not naive, nor unaware of the issues. They simply love Obama. They are impressed by his swatting a fly on national TV, but don’t bother to be impressed when I catch a fly with one hand (a large fly..yes).. keep it alive to feed to our bearded lizard (I have very fast reflexes..:) from my shortstop days..). In a nutshell, Obama is cool… I am not (at least to them… I like to think I’m a “bit” cool…
“They’re not naive, nor unaware of the issues. They simply love Obama. “- whitepaw
Powerful stuff in your post about the youth. I had said something similar to a friend over the fourth of July weekend. They had been saying how Obama is losing votes etc…And I kept reminding everyone Obama is like a sleeping giant…he won the White House on a coalition of the youth vote, young Hispanics, Blacks & Liberals. He looks weak now to many because…this is a rough presidency for anyone following George Bush Jr. Yes, Obama is a novice,but he is not doing that bad enough a job for many to want Sarah Palin as President.
Speaking of Ms. Palin her poll numbers are identical to Bush when he was at his all time lowest. Yet, the media continues to over look this and push her as a serious contender. She doesn’t have the appeal Obama can generate among the youth to go vote for him again 2012. Hispanics don’t trust Palin and Blacks despise her for constantly attacking Obama…and Liberals feel she is a serious threat to their rights. No, matter Obama problems, he is a hell of lot better than Palin. And your right, the youth vote will return even stronger to back Obama again.
How can you say she is a hell of a lot better than Obama? We don’t have a president…we have a narcissistic idoled rock star. Palin could NOT be any worse.
Oh yeah? We’re not at war with Iran. Obama Derangement Syndrome much?
Sarah Palin is tabloid. That’s why the corporate media loves her. They love all things tabloid.
It will take a while, but she will become as irrelevant as Anne Covlter is now once it appears she flops on the national stage (again).
Next they will be voting for Hannah Montana for president. That is how much they know or care to know.
Maybe not, when they can’t get a job after college. oh, I forgot, that’s what welfare is for. They just expect the government to take care of them.
But, just to let you know, my stepson, voted for Obama, but, he has become very conservative the last 18 months. Imagine that? Kids aren’t too stupid after all.
Ok, here goes.
First, those who think Sarah Palin is stupid obviously isn’t listening…refuses to listen…doesn’t want to believe anything other than what the media tried to portray her as during the camapaign with “gotcha” soundbites and edited to death interviews to put her in the worst light. And for those who underestimate this woman are in for a rude awakening. Believe what your closed mind will allow you to beleive about her. Keep the clay in your ears and keep up with your angry and hateful comments about her. But do it at your own risk.
I was a Democrat for 32 years. Campaigned for Hillary day and night because , although everyone kept saying how “intelligent” Obama was, I knew in the deepest crevices of my soul the man was not up to the job of president. Yes, I would take a college course from him, but NOT president. It was all rhetoric…nothing substantial. Many heard music when this pied piper spoke. He was so “intelligent!” I heard over and over again until I wanted to vomit.
Then comes along a Republican woman who says all the things I wanted to hear out of the mouth of Obama and did not hear. Fiscal conservatism…smaller government…getting out of debt…a light on corruption in Washington…and many many other things. Socially I did not agree with her many things, like abortion and gay marriage. But it didn’t matter to me. I believe in my heart she is not like the others. She IS an outsider and she is one of the people. AND THOSE WHO REFIUSE TO SEE ANYTHING GOOD ABOU WHAT SHE IS AND WHAT SHE STANDS FOR…well, you have my sympathy, because YOU JUST AREN”T LISTENING AT ALL. Taylor, correct me if I am wrong, but even Taylor sees some merit to the woman.
That interview with Katie Couric wasn’t edited to death. It cuts straight through. I just watched it again. She’s an idiot.
“Then comes along a Republican woman who says all the things I wanted to hear out of the mouth of Obama and did not hear. Fiscal conservatism…smaller government…getting out of debt…a light on corruption in Washington…and many many other things. Socially I did not agree with her many things, like abortion and gay marriage. But it didn’t matter to me.”
I’m sure Sec. Clinton appreciates your campaign effort, even though you believe in all the things she (and Obama) oppose.
You may have been a “democrat” for 32 years, but all the things you believe in are Republican principles.
Hi NFS — I don’t agree with her politics at all… but I disagree that she’s stupid although she may be lacking in judgment (foolish) when it comes to our views re: politics… However, to those who don’t see things from a progressive perspective… she’s not foolish.
She is uneducated in many areas.. but I find it hard to believe someone who has ammassed a great fortune and drawn gazillions of supporters over just a few years is stupid or foolish. Depends on one’s perspective.
Nonetheless, I don’t believe it furthers the progressive agenda to label her stupid or foolish… just because she is not liked by progressives.
I think it all depends on what the definition of ‘idiot’ is.
She displays the same lack of intellectual curiosity about her world that George W. Bush displayed.
Does she have a low IQ? Obviously not. I always argued against people who said George W. Bush was unintelligent.
But to be so willfully ignorant and dangerous is, in my opinion, still idiocy.
Editing had nothing to do with that video. How can she be leader of the free world if she cannot answer simple questions about it?
That’s my point… she’s not well-educated.
I recognize that…. I just don’t think it has helped thus far to paint her as idiotic or stupid. May come back to haunt us progressives..
And…maybe not. It will either convince or anger those who are on the fence about her… How much confidence do you have in the electorate? Do you think most are driven by reason? or by emotion?
Well, they said the liberal obsession over George W. Bush’s intelligence did more harm than good, as it helped him appeal more to working class voters who feel left behind by an educated elite in America. So I do understand the danger in enhancing her appeal through false labels of unintelligence.
Actually, I don’t even think she is even that “uneducated”. She went to five colleges, which is three more than I went to. She clearly isn’t as intelligent or educated as Sec. Clinton, but as Ms. Marsh notes, Sarah Palin managed to get herself to where she is in life through some craft.
Much like George W. Bush, I do think is that she displays a frightening lack of intellectual curiosity about her world and an unwillingness to learn. And we’ve lived through the dangers of that personal defect coupled with neoconservatism.
For her own peril, I believe this philosophy about life will backfire on her. We live in a very sexist nation. While people found George W. Bush’s “stupidity” endearing, I think people will recoil from Sarah Palin’s as evidence of “ditziness”, as someone noted above. She won’t be able to win people over with it like George W. Bush did.
NFS — You may very well be right..
I think your first paragraph nailed what I was trying to say (better than I could… thanks..
)
Also — when I stated that she’s uneducated… I meant that she displays a lack of knowledge re: subjects that many consider important for a POTUS to understand… history, foreign policy, etc.
I do think she compares “well” to GWB…
Your comment about us living in a “very sexist nation” still disheartens me… as a woman.
Always enjoy your posts.
I think we are both trying to express the same thought, and I feel you are saying more eloquently what I had hoped to say.
* * *
Here is Sarah Palin’s favorability (not job approval) on pollster (35/53). It is abysmal, and getting worse.
http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/fav-palin.php
Contrast this with Obama’s favorability (50/43), which is almost the exact opposite.
Say what we will. People still like Barack Obama, and they don’t like Sarah Palin. Can she turn this around? I fail to see how.
Have you ever taken a basic film editing class? You should.
getty1206 —
I agree Sarah Palin is not stupid… I don’t think anyone who manages to make millions in a few years is stupid. Not at all.
I do think that Sarah Palin is not well educated when it comes to certain aspects of American History, foreign policy, etc. I too am not well-educated in this regard. That doesn’t make me stupid. Just means my knowledge is focused in other areas.
So again, I agree that she is not stupid. But to many, to be POTUS, you need to display knowledgeable of these subjects. Oh… wait… I’m wrong… we elected GWB to two terms…
knowledge of these subjects (OK Taylor — count me in on wanting an edit option)..
I hate my typos… sorry..
Mrs. Palin is a realist, she deals with issues that are important and will make a difference to her constituents. History can be studied and researched when it is of importance to the issue at hand. I know that all of the “intellectuals” that contribute to this site, do not, can not know everything and would take time to research topics when it is applicable to the current issue. Palin is totally capable of doing this and does so when necessary.
Sarah Palin is not stupid but where has she shown an in depth knowledge of anything policy-related? It’s one thing to spew talking points in a stump speech or via twitter or in a friendly interview but at the end of the day, a lot of people can do that. And Palin supporters just write off her total lack of knowledge, or interest in becoming knowledgeable, as nothing more than liberal elite media “gotcha” tactics. And I think the only reason for that is her bumper-sticker rhetoric is something they agree with.
When it comes to in-depth knowledge of domestic and foreign policy, her supporters give her a pass and I want to know why? They seem to want to say that either it’s a) not true or b) even if it is it doesn’t matter because a lot of people don’t know the specifics of foreign and domestic policy. But how far are we willing to lower the bar? I expect my leaders to know more than my neighbor. But with Palin, she was held to a different standard, why? Biden may make gaffes but can you imagine if he displayed her utter lack ability on almost every subject? Who would be making excuses for that? Not me.
Now that she has tons of money, she can surround herself with knowledgeable people, but that doesn’t make HER any more knowledgeable. To me, she comes across as someone who needs a LOT of people around her to get her from point A to point B. She doesn’t strike me as someone who could manage this on her own because of all of the above. She gut a lucky break being plucked from obscurity by McCain and in a news culture which values celebrity and soundbites, she’s done very well for herself, but to me, that doesn’t make her a leader- it makes her more of a glenn beck or Limbaugh-like celebrity. Influential? Yes, but in our celebrity-crazed culture, influence doesn’t necessarily equal quality or knowledge.
SCB — I agree 100% with your post…
Unfortunately, you are speaking to us on this blog… not the electorate. The electorate that elected GWB to “2″ terms!!!
I don’t think Palin has a hope or a chance of becoming the next POTUS… as I’ve stated in my posts above.
Despite the fact that Sarah Palin is supposed to be the outdoorsy woman, I just had this strange vision of Sec. Clinton kicking arse on Survivorman or Man versus Nature with Bear Grylls.
As noted above, I think sexism in our culture will be her ultimate downfall.
It was a very cynical sexist ploy that brought her to fame. But the same sexist culture that found George W. Bush’s gaffes endearing and worthy of having a beer with will hold Sarah Palin to a much, much higher standard. As we have seen already, people recoil from George W. Bush coming out of Sarah Palin’s mouth. She will be labeled as a ditz and dangerous and unqualified, and it will stick.
Interesting… I am not sure I agree with you about how sexism will impact Sarah Palin… Anyway — gotta sign off — has been fun chatting with you all…
Obama had NO experience either, and he got a pass. Why? Because he was “well educated”? Oh , please. You arguement gets stuffed right here.
Obama had been in politics for 11 years before becoming President.
Miss Bendy Straws, the hero of the fearful fifth, is nothing but a half-term quitter.
Biden does display utter lack of ability on almost every subject. So does his boss.
And why isn’t your hero, hillary trying to do something about the poor woman in Iran who is supposed to be hanged for her alleged adultery? I know international women’s right’s is near and dear to Taylor’s heart, as it is mine. is your girl hillary out there trying to do anything? I hope so, maybe, I just haven’t heard anything, yet?
I laugh my ass off at Republicans who even hint of mocking someone bringing up a female joke at Palin
When Hillary was running and nobody knew Palin, they mocked and questioned whether a woman could run for President ALL THE TIME
Now? Now they try to act like they own the high ground
Bull.
The only people I heard questioning whether a Women could run for president or handle the job were women so called journalists. They would say stuff like, “how can she handle the job and be a mother, too??? What crap.
Women are their own worst enemies.
Taylor:
You say:
Andrew Sullivan, perpetual Hillary hater and Palin conspiracy theorist, writes about this today; at least he understands Palin’s power, which is more than I can say for most, especially on the left. Interesting that career Hillary hater Chris Matthews gets what’s possible for Sarah, too. In the post-Hillary political era, it seems some men have finally awakened.
I really couldn’t disagree with your characterizations of Sullivan and Mathews more. First Andrew is no liberal – at best he’s a political barfly who’s shtick was to be a gay conservative since being a gay liberal was way too passe – remember he supported the Iraq war and was all in swoons over GW Bush at that time. Since then he’s tired of him but in no way, shape or form is he a liberal. Re: Chris Matthews – he’s simply an idiot who worships whoever is in power and hates those that he’s supposed to hate. He loved G W Bush while in office but again now he hates his guts.
Again nothing new here – time to move on.
Sorry – I should have stopped the italics after the quote and before the next paragraph –
Taylor could we have preview here?
M-
While I don’t necessarily believe that to have made alot of money denotes intelligence. It does indicate a certain shrewdness that I believe Palin has in spades.She is an opportunist of the first order. That is something she shares with Obama. They both know how to reap every advantage out of a personal opportunity.McCain gave her an opportunity and boy has she run with it.
She also has moxie and a certain fearlessness and an unearned selfconfidence. She loves a good fight and tweaking power is her stock and trade. All of these traits probably helped her a lot when she ran for governor and they explain her current successes.
Aside from her ideology,her unwillingness to to be educated is the scariest thing about her.But it does not make her unelectable. Bush made a virtue out of being a gentleman’s C student,he was a terrible,extremely unknowledgeable debater but he was a mean,low down dirty political operator. It won him the WH twice. Can Palin be as mean? I think she can. She does not have the Bush connections nor the machine but she has those crazy people willing to run off a cliff
for her.
…and SCB is so right she has good looks,without which she would be nowhere in our culture.Do you think if she looked like Janet Napalitano she would be featured in every cable talk show? Ha!
Palin isn’t stupid, she’s a moron. Morons are not capable of learning. They can be programmed however. In the same way that any computer can be programmed. Programmable morons are just the type of people the Republican intelligentsia needs to fill it’s leadership positions and its voter base. T-baggers, FOX news watchers, and Palin devotees (and cheerleaders) are all programmable morons who are incapable of learning. That’s a rule. There are no exceptions to that rule. None. Peace
Hi Imhotep… She’s not a moron either… Your definition of her does little to help progressives.. Just my opinion. Peace
It’s very nice to have opinions. Now, please tell me how my definition of her hurts progressives? If you don’t like moron how about: fool, ass, dope, nitwit, ninny, dunce, dumbhead, dummy, loony, nut, oaf, numbskull, dimwit, imbecile, half-wit, muttonhead, bonehead, dumbbell, nincompoop, boob, jackass or my personal favorite behind moron–sap? Peace
Hi … and I will start with Peace…
I’m not defending her… I’m arguing that to ridicule her may not serve the best interests of progressives. I may be wrong… but that’s my take.
NFS put it best above:
“Well, they said the liberal obsession over George W. Bush’s intelligence did more harm than good, as it helped him appeal more to working class voters who feel left behind by an educated elite in America. So I do understand the danger in enhancing her appeal through false labels of unintelligence. ”
** Peace **
P.S. … Arrogance accomplishes little…
** Peace **
Bingo.
The label doesn’t help progressives because it energized her base and frankly doesn’t do anything to promote our point of view.
Face it one of the reasons Palin is loved by all those folks is because she doesn’t claim to be smart or even analytical – she says what she believes even if its stupid. To put it crudely they want to support somebody who thinks like them or (snark) doesn’t think much at all. After all its the “thinking folks” that got us into this mess. The want black and white because when they have to deal with gray the answers aren’t easy anymore and don’t fit with their preconceived notions.
There are many ways to deal with Palin that make her look small – why just fling insults to make us look small and turn her into a victim?
Thank you! That’s my view as well..
Boy, mW, you must really think you are an elitest. you are so insulting. I am a Palin supporter and it isn’t because she doesn’t claim to be smart or even analytical. You really show your stupidity by those comments.
Obviously “the thinking folks” as you call them, really don’t think, they just blow smoke.
Imhotep, Stop calling yourself names.
yippee!
Imhotep is afraid of Sarah Palin!
You don’t live up to your code name, Imhotep, sorry.
When people call her names like dumb or stupid, it draws her support. The rural voters get ticked off at things like that. I don’t no what she is going to do, I don’t know about her becoming president but she could run for another office such as congresswoman or senator. She could become the next party chair of the RNC or be a celebrity like Oprah. Its hard to tell, people thought she would disapear after 2008 and they were wrong big time !! I would not count out Sarah Palin !! She knows how to fight and claw her way to the top !!
I’m new here. My problem with the entire Palin premise is we are arguing how smart/dumb/moronic/fill in the blank, she is. To me, that is not the issue. A true baffoon would not be able to maintain momentum and do what she does (despite how I truly feel about her, and that is she is not smart at all, just a driven opportunist who my wife thinks should have said “no” to J. McCain).
The issue, for me, is that she is “aware” enough (or, at least the people around her are) to prey on the particular set of people in this country that don’t rely on anything surrounded by truth, facts, or real history when it comes to voting (in other words, she is like many other of todays Republicans). She is a demogogue in a world full of them. Her weapon is the fact that she has learned how to whip the masses into a frenzy, is charasmatic and “hot” to most that follow her (trust me, I work with two men who drool over her), and does not let reality get in her way. Savy she might be, like all other politicans, but admirable she isn’t! I know I am a man, but trust me, I get IT; I’m just not buying into it.
Taylor keeps giving her props, and that’s fine, but she (Palin) is neither original nor driven by something good or noble. I simply can not give her credit, when the only reason she is around is because the McCain campaign chose her simply because of Hillary Clinton’s success. HC did the work, fought the fight, is superior in intellect, etc. Palin is simply taking continual advantage of the fact that she was once the VP candidate, who was once a governor of a state no one heard of.
I doubt she will win the GOP nomination, but if she actually does, an easy win for our current President is in the bag. Why? Because she will no longer be in the nice little bubble she is in now. She will actually have to give some original verbal thoughts, some hard interviews, and make some progress in her real knowledge of history and the constitution. All women will be in play in the general election and most of them that I know still have the same low opinion of her that they did in 2008.
Just ask my wife, who is an executive, and she will tell you with a roll of her eyes and some choice words I won’t, or can’t use here, that “she makes all educated, driven, and successful women look like they worked way to hard to acheive what they have. Honestly, she truly believes she is capable of running a country. She will be exposed, again, before this is all done. “. Those are some harsh and honest words.
I’ve never admired anyone for taking shortcuts to try and achieve something they surely are not capable of doing. And I’m surely not going to start now.
Nice site, by the way, Taylor. Thanks.
Time will tell. But I am betting on the “stupid” one instead of the “intelligent” one. In a couple more years most of America will see Obama for who he really is and people will be BEGGING for change by then.
I wouldn’t count on that getty, no matter who the GOP nom. is. I know Obama is reviled by most Taylor Marsh followers, of which I am an exception, but this political animal of a President still has more than half of his term left, and that’s plenty of time for him to go up, down, and back up again in the eyes of Americans. I am unhappy with him on many levels, but he still has plenty of time to do some great things, no matter who you and others think he “really” is.
The basic question I ask all of my friends, be they conservative or progressive is this; do you want another sooth sayer like Bush, who simply wanted to be the “decider”, never really caring about the histroy of the office and by default failed on EVERY level? If the answer is yes, no matter what level your enthusiasm, then go for Palin or any Republican. They are all the same, really. Someone like that will indeed get elected again, but not in 2012. The Tea Party will make sure of that.
Palin, who I firmly believe, is a coward and deep, deep down, a compuslive quitter, will flame out and fade away before it ever gets to that anyway. Obama will be facing someone else methinks. And, despite his downward turn of late, almost everyone I talk with would still vote for him over the fill in the blank Republican. But, again, 2.5 years is a long time. Palin, for all of her following, will implode by then.
Even if he narrowly gets a Republican House, imagine him teeing off on Orange Boehner and the like every day like Clinton beat down Newt?
Some of the left love talking about Sarah Palin. I don’t no what person some on the left will find to talk about next !! Alot of people thought she was going to go away after 2008, and it didn’t happen. So its 2010 and she is still around and making alot of money and endorcing candidates. Like I said I don’t no if she will run for president, but she is planning on sticking around. 2.5 years I don’t think her base will implode !! Some people may not like it but she was the first republican woman on a national party ticket as well as the second woman to be on a national party ticket. Her being the first means she will not just go away like some hope she will.
iampiedaddy, I think you need to read the article again. It’s not “props,” but credit where it’s due, as her new fundraising numbers prove.
As for your wife, Palin may indeed be “exposed,” but that really has nothing whatsoever to do with the power she’s amassing or the role she’s playing and the fact she’s capitalizing on the Hillary effect.
Palin’s new fundraising numbers prove I’m correct.
http://www.taylormarsh.com/2010/07/12/sarah-becomes-a-player-but-mitt-raises-more/
Let me be careful here; so you say you aren’t giving her props, yet you continue to give her credit. Fine, semantics being what they are.
I did read your article again; I still get the impression you are giving her more than just credit. Are you? Do you really admire a person who is doing nothing more than taking advantage of a situation(s) and preying on people’s misinformed fears? It seems to me you are.
So she quit her job in Alaska to become powerful among the crazies and the born agains who are back from the Rove era during the Bush years. That doesn’t say so much about her, and her taking advantage of the HC effect, as much as it does about those that support her. (sort of along the lines on what SecyClintonBlog said). These people, the 33%ers, are always going to be there for the whacko’ conservative/anti-government flavor o’ the month. Nothing original here.
I get that she’s a rock star. I get that she has charisma. I get that she has taken off with the Tea Party brand and gone against the norm of Republicans. I get the fact money is being thrown at her and her chosen candidates. I even get the fact that “momma grizzlies” are flocking to her. (though I am puzzled by all of the animal references with her)
Taylor, I get all of that and the power she possesses right now. But giving her credit, when she has done nothing other than follow a model? Well, that I just can’t do. She saw an opportunity to be powerful, famous, and make loads of money and took it; nothing unique about that at all.
Talk to me.