Posted on 01/14/2011 2:53:17 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
OK, so it's not going to be Sarah Palin in '12 ... ... but the Republicans still have to nominate someone to run against Barack Obama. Who will it be?
One of the consequences of Sarah Palin's decision to break her silence on the Tucson tragedy just hours before President Obama was to address a nationally televised memorial service on Wednesday is that the next day's news coverage is filled with observations like this, from Politico's Jonathan Martin:
At sunrise in the east on Wednesday, Sarah Palin demonstrated that she has little interest -- or capacity -- in moving beyond her brand of grievance-based politics. And at sundown in the west, Barack Obama reminded even his critics of his ability to rally disparate Americans around a message of reconciliation.
Of course, this was a competition that Palin was never going to win. Some of it has to do with her. As I noted yesterday, it's just not in her nature to bite her tongue when she feels that her opponents are actively wronging her, even if it would be in her best interests politically. I happen to believe the attention that's been paid to Palin's rhetoric and to her cross-hairs map since last Saturday has been unwarranted; the connection between Gabrielle Giffords' shooter and right-wing rhetoric that many initially assumed simply doesn't exist -- and claims that the "political climate" pushed Jared Loughner over the edge strike me as a slippery, speculative and impossible to prove way for Palin critics to attach some blame to her anyway. To me, at least, she has a legitimate gripe -- but by making her own sense of victimhood the main thrust of her speech, Palin was setting herself up for a world of grief.
But even if she had taken a different tone, there was still no way of avoiding unfavorable comparisons with Obama. After all, if there's one thing Obama unfailingly excels at, it's delivering a big speech. The president's skills as an off-the-cuff communicator -- in press conferences, at town hall events -- are often derided, and he's not particularly inspiring when it comes to Oval Office addresses either. But put him in a giant arena filled with a friendly crowd, and he will deliver -- always. Add in the fact, as Jonathan Bernstein noted this morning, that it was "an easy speech" because everyone wanted Obama to succeed, and there was just no way that his address wasn't going to be heralded almost universally as a home run -- and that, by comparison, commentators would judge Palin's harshly.
My sense is that the events of the last week have been very helpful to Republicans who do not want Palin to be their nominee in 2012. As we've noted, a growing number of influential conservatives were already throwing cold water on the idea of a Palin '12 campaign even before Tucson. And their words seemed to be having an effect: Between the end of 2009 and the end of 2010, the number of Republican voters who said they were open to the idea of backing Palin dropped by 20 points. This didn't happen with any other major Republican eyeing the race. When you look at what's happened in the last week -- the fact that the left immediately zoomed in on Palin when this tragedy struck, that the media so readily played along and made her the focus in its aftermath, and that Palin chose to respond in the manner she did (and that she chose to do so on a day that invited impossible to win comparisons with Obama) -- it should only hasten Palin's demise within her own party. Yes, of course, a lot can happen in the next 12 months, and Tucson may be a long-forgotten memory by then. But Palin's problems are much bigger than Tucson.
Maybe Palin will end up running, and maybe she won't. I can now easily imagine a scenario in which she realizes that an embarrassing finish is likely, declines to run, and signs on for another season of "Sarah Palin's Alaska." Or maybe she'll plow ahead with a campaign anyway. But I don't think she looms as quite the 800-pound gorilla we all took her for just a few months ago, when Palin-ish Tea Party candidates were scoring upset wins in major Republican Senate primaries.
If this is true, then the biggest beneficiary is probably Mike Huckabee, whose base overlaps more with Palin's than any other top-tier Republican. Winning Iowa, like he did in 2008, is key to any '12 strategy for Huckabee. He can do it in a field without Palin or with a severely weakened Palin. But if she were to run and pull a significant share of the vote, it would potentially be at his expense.
A weak-nonexistent Palin candidacy probably hurts Mitt Romney the most. There's a theory that Iowa, with its Christian/activist-oriented caucus electorate, will essentially serve to anoint a cultural conservative candidate, while New Hampshire, where the Republican electorate has been hostile to Southern- and religious-tinted conservatism in past presidential primaries (9 percent for Pat Robertson in 1988, for instance), will pick the mainstream contender -- and that the race will then be settled in the subsequent states. Under this theory, Romney (the clear early favorite in New Hampshire) would be much better served by a Palin victory in Iowa, since far more Republicans seem to have reservations about her than they do about Huckabee. (The same poll that showed Palin's standing with Republicans dropping 20 points in the last year also found Huckabee to be the most popular of all the '12 candidates.) Huckabee seems to have more crossover potential than past religious conservatives who have run for president, and the South's dominance within the GOP is only growing. The most underreported aspect of the '12 race right now may be how well-positioned he is to win the nomination.
Granted, there are other candidates who will end up running and who could break through, threatening Huckabee (or Palin) in Iowa or Romney in New Hampshire. And both Huckabee and Romney need to be careful about the bar being set too high in those early states. A parallel can be drawn to Bob Dole, who was called the "president of Iowa" after netting 37 percent in the 1988 caucuses -- nearly doubling the total of then Vice President George H.W. Bush (who himself had beaten Ronald Reagan in the 1980 caucuses). When Dole ran again in 1996, it was widely assumed that he'd again romp through Iowa; the suspense, supposedly, was over who would finish a distant second. Dole did end up winning Iowa again, but with a meager 27 percent -- just 4 points ahead of Pat Buchanan. The result was taken as a blow to Dole, who then lost New Hampshire to Buchanan. It still wasn't enough to cost Dole the nomination, mainly because Buchanan was too polarizing even within the GOP, but it almost did: When the early New Hampshire returns showed him running in third place (behind Lamar Alexander), Dole told his team that he'd drop out if the result held.
9 percent unemployment and a million foreclosures a year would end any ones presidency.
If they didn’t have 98% ofthe press, 60% of the bloggers, 100% of the ISP/Search Engines, Facebook, academia, Hollywood, Broadway, Silicon Valley and the entire federal government in their corner...
Jonah Goldberg allied himself with famous Palinphobe Charles Krauthammer against RUSH LIMBAUGH!!!
Along with his own anti-Palin drivel lately I think we can put another ersatz conservative in the RINO column—not because he ain't conservative but because he is stupid and we don't need those.
Picking a fight with elRushbo—whatta dunce.
These liberals greatly fear Governor Palin, and are paranoid and rabid in their fear. - I doubt she will even run, and I don’t blame her. If a solid conservative expresses a desire to run, I don’t think she will expose herself and her family to the horror that the Obamaites will heap on her. Obama knows his leftist constituency and their “useful idiots” will automatically do his dirty work for him. What passes for “journalists” in this country for the most part is a disgrace. - Palin answered the charges they had been leveling against her for days on end and answered them well and with inspiration. Many in this country bought a bill of goods with Obama; now his power is becoming set in stone by his enablers and those they influence.
If nothing changes, it will be anybody but Obama. I don’t care how much they kick and scream. Everyone will have a very good chance, including Palin.
I have not heard a Positive report on Sarahs Speech in the Main stream media including Fox,the Establishment ,good old Boys Club has it in for her. I feel the same way you do about the Speech but this woman is never going to make it,her problem is she is the exact Candidate The Country needs,she Threatens Both sides! That is why she doesnt have a Chance,even if there are a lot of ordinary Hardworking Americans that want to see her run,she will be savaged by BOTH sides,I dont Know how you overcome that,even Ronald Reagan Had one side working for him.
Are you sure this isn’t satire? It’s making me laugh out loud at the writer’s stupidity.
Yeah, I think some of these folks doth protest too much.
It’s just odd. Why all these articles about she can’t, she won’t, she’ll never? It reads more like wish fulfillment than political analysis.
We Catholics have a saying about papal elections: “Go in a Pope, come out a Cardinal.” If pundits are under the impression that their solemn pronouncements on front runners and viability speak for the electorate they are sadly mistaken. The nation is much larger than they are.
Vulture like. People are killed and its all about the horse race.
Obama is a decent orator and a mediocre speech writer but eveytime he speaks, the media gush over him like it was Hitler at Nuremburg. Even the conservative media this time which is highly disappointing.
The RINO media are afraid of being seen as bigoted racists, which is why we’ll probably have Mitt Romney as our nominee next year. I’ll write you a postcard from a tropical island if that happens.
I am beginning to doubt she runs, either...the country really doesn’t deserve her.
Want to read something that’ll make this column look sober, non-partisan and reflective?
http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/82025
I had been more of a DeMint or Jindal supporter, until this week. What I saw from the dispicable left, and how Sarah responded has made me reconsider. The liberal loons are masters of creating unintended consequences.
I don’t think she is running.
Barfo-Rama!
They will viciously attack any republican nominee we put up.
We could really make liberals heads explode if we could convince Rush to run.
;^)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.