From New York magazine, a report reveals that after the Tucson domestic terrorism tragedy, Sarah Palin put in a call to Roger Ailes.
Before Sarah Palin posted her infamous “Blood Libel” video on Facebook on January 12, she placed a call to Fox News chairman Roger Ailes. In the wake of the Tucson massacre, Palin was fuming that the media was blaming her heated rhetoric for the actions of a madman that left six people dead and thirteen others injured, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.
Palin told Ailes she wanted to respond, according to a person with knowledge of the call. It wasn’t fair the media was making this about her. Ailes told Palin that she should stay quiet.
“Lie low,” he said. “There’s no need to inject yourself into the story.”
With a Fox GOP debate on May 5 in South Carolina, Sarah Palin will have another decision to make and so will Fox, because if she participates she’ll be suspended, along with Gingrich and Santorum, but if she doesn’t it doesn’t mean she isn’t still considering a run. What will Ailes do then and how long will he let Palin vamp?
This was discussed today on “Morning Joe,” with Mark Halperin (about 4:20 in the video at that link) the only one remotely understanding Palin, saying correctly that “she makes decisions based on her own perspective and not by traditional method.” Beyond that it’s a matter of ego and whether Palin can resist the convenience of the Fox News channel klieg lights.
Love him or hate his network, Mr. Ailes is a smart Republican strategist, which was proven long ago. No one has done more good for the Right or given Republicans more power than Fox News channel.
While it’s certainly understandable that Palin was “fuming” she was taking heat over her crosshairs graphic, her inability to listen to reason, while letting her ego be her guide, reveals one aspect of her political insecurity that would also make her dangerous if she ever got the power of the presidency.
After Palin’s blood-libel video fiasco, however, even if she can win the Republican nomination, which remains the case, her chance at securing the presidency has dropped significantly since Tucson.
However, some Republicans remain worried that the primary process could catapult Palin to the nomination.
Former Sen. Judd Gregg pens an extraordinary op-ed in The Hill yesterday making this case:
Because the nominating process has become so dominated by primary elections, with the vast majority of the delegates chosen by direct vote, it is entirely possible that with no presumptive winner or even favorites, a candidate who runs second or third in a great many primaries could go into the convention with a sizable block of delegates.
Who would this favor? Does Sarah Palin come to mind? Although she is not viewed by most as strong enough to win, she is viewed by many as a person worth voting for to make a statement. And primaries tend to be populated by people who go to the polls with the purpose of making a statement.
Underlying Gregg’s concern is that Republicans simply have no one in the field who can beat Barack Obama.
Conventional wisdom in establishment Republican circles is becoming that only Tim Pawlenty has a chance of winning. I think this is laughable. If anything he’d be the Michael Dukakis of the Right and lead Republicans to a devastating defeat. Actually, the only candidate who has that chance isn’t running and his name is Chris Christie.
Even with progressives disappointed with Obama’s first-term, the lesser evil option when compared to the Right remains why most Democrats inevitably come home at election time, which would expand exponentially if Sarah Palin was the nominee. As the Right targets women, and is gnashing to get at Social Security, with Republicans likely to dominate both chambers of Congress after 2012, Pres. Obama’s “lesser evil” mantle may mean more to people than disgruntled people on the Left will ever admit.
Enter Sarah Palin’s nomination for president.
Depressingly, no woman in the history of our republic has ever made it to the top of the ticket.
So, since Republicans are likely to lose to Obama anyway, wouldn’t placing the first woman on the presidential ballot, even if it’s Sarah Palin, be a signal worth sending?
It way too early to sound hte death knell for the Republicans. Mitch Daniels and Mitt Romeny could certainly beat Obama.
If it comes down to a convention fight, Sarah Palin will lose – the powers that be will see to that. They want to win and she could NEVER (barring a dead boy picture) beat Obama.
It all comes down to jobs. If unemployment stays high, then that’s the ball game. All this other talk is white noise nonsense.
agree
Nice illustration you have there, maybe those people who were screaming for her blood, on Twitter reflect it better. Maybe those who emailed and called for Walker’s death, should be worthy of note. but no hang on an unsourced quote, and someone foolish enough to consider Obama’s Commerce secretary
offer.
Taylor posted: ***So, since Republicans are likely to lose to Obama anyway, wouldn’t placing the first woman on the presidential ballot, even if it’s Sarah Palin, be a signal worth sending?***
What is newsworthy and symbolic in making Sarah Palin the GOP nominee for President in 2012? Other than their wimmen can be just as idiotic as their men. I think it would hurt the cause of America making a woman, president. I find Sarah Palin as GOP nominee as farcical as the DNC nominating Lady Gaga for President, in response to Sarah Palin’s nomination. My controversial woman vs your controversial woman. If we are doing to go down that childish and “cult of personality” road, why not?
Obama is Wall Street’s selection. They have the $ and means to get him re-elected and shall. It is up to the Democratic base to elect REAL Democrats down ticket. If not, I see no reason to vote.
cmugirl, Mitch Daniels could NOT get elected Governor of Indiana, again. The corporate mainstream media has tried to make it appear that Daniels is moderate. He’s no such thing. He’s a RWer from the Dubya Dumbo camp. “My Man Mitch” which was Dubya’s nickname for him, he ran on that idiocy the last two elections in Indiana. Indiana is now paying a steep price. As far as Mitt “Magic Panties” Romney, he could not carry the South at any time. Not with the Teahadists assault on the RNC. So neither could beat Obama. Tim Pawlenty? Maybe if you are a Fox News viewer, but he’s still a Yankee and would not inspire the South to vote. I do agree with you that Palin is just white hot noise. She’s the *role* di(per)version the GOP so desperately needs for their angry white men candidates. She’s not running.
The Republicans want to win. Period. If the powers that be see from their polls and whatever else they use that Obama is weak and someone can beat him, then that’s who they will put up as their nominee. They will look past Romney care (which, in my opinion, as an issue peaked too early. By the time it really matters for his Republican opponents to clobber him with it, it will be old news) and his Mormonism (which was so 2008, anyways).
I repeat. If they smell blood in the water, they will put up the candidate that can win. They will also have the wind at their backs, as they are likely to pick up the majority in the Senate and control the entire Congress.
narcisco,
wut??????????????
It has nothing to do with Romney being a Yankee, but his support for MassCare, for the sacking of the GM board, for
Obama’s betrayal of the Green Revolution, his unseemly urging
to kick Mubarak out, and how that has turned out, Otherwise
he seems very Don Draper in his plastic nature. While QE 2
has set the Middle East ablaze, while the oil moratorium has
let oil go nearly to four dollars a gallon, you focus on ephemeral things.
Sounds like Judd Gregg does not really approve of democracy. The very idea that the people who actually go and vote should have a voice!
Personally, I would like to see a first women candidate from the GOP be someone all women can admire even if they don’t agree with her politics. I think Hillary earned the respect of many GOP women even if they would not have voted for her.
“Respect” without the vote means squat.
It depends on who gets out the vote in the primarys and who has the best grassroots effort !! This is the republican base she needs to win !! If Mike Huckabee don’t run, it looks like he won’t, but who knows !! Ever since his book tour, he has been making flubs about President Obamas birthplace among other things, that to me was the greatest threat to Sarah Palin !! I doubt that Chris Christie is going to run unless the GOP establishment pressure him to do it. Tim Pawlenty is too boring and Mitt Romney with his RomCare and don’t even get me started on Newt Gingrich, I really don’t see why should shouldn’t run !! Its either now or never !! In 2016, you will have Chris Christie, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio among others !!! She hired a Chief of Staff for her PAC, which from reporting wasn’t bad she was just behind Mitt Romney !! So who knows !!
Well, I don’t know what is going to happen but the GOP sure has put a coterie of losers so far with the exception of Romney. I can’t decide if we are going to see a repeat of ’72 with the GOP candidate being McGovern or 1976 and the GOP being Jimmy Carter. Unless the GOP implodes which is not impossible and in some ways seems likely, Obama is going to have to REALLY work this time to get reelected. It’s not going to be easy and nobody and I mean NOBODY is going to have any tolerance for his thin skin and penchant for whining.
And I agree that Pawlenty is Dukakis of the midwest. Besides, what is he going to run on? That the bridges collapsed in MN while he was Governor?
“So, since Republicans are likely to lose to Obama anyway, wouldn’t placing the first woman on the presidential ballot, even if it’s Sarah Palin, be a signal worth sending?”-Taylor
A better signal the right could send is electing a woman more qualified than Sarah Palin. Just having any woman make it to the top of the ticket is not a good enough message. I still think it would be historic move for the GOP and all women to have her at the top of the ticket…I just wish it was somebody else.