Replies

There is an interesting dichotomy brewing among Democrats. There is the one faction that believes that Sarah is an idiot and a buffoon and too polarizing to be taken seriously by masses of undecided or independent or moderate voters-they lick their lips with glee and say bring her on and then there is the other faction-a more rational segment of the Democrats (yes Virginia it does exist in the Democratic party contrary to rumor)that understands the value of God-given talent and charisma to a politician influencing voters (unknown variable), that if administered truth serum would admit that Sarah has a lot on the ball and is not a dunce or ill-informed and that she is dangerous to Obama and thus must be marginalized or destroyed.

Thomas Sowell wrote about what Democrats thought about Reagan back in 1980 by citing Meg Greenfield in the Washington post:

It was the wisdom of the other contenders and of most Republican Party leaders, too, not to mention of practically everyone in Democratic politics, that Reagan was: too old, too extreme, too marginal and not nearly smart enough to win the nomination. The Democrats, in fact, when they weren’t chortling about him, were fervently hoping he would be the nominee. When he carried the convention in Detroit, people I knew in the Carter White House were ecstatic.

And sometimes Republicans even make this mistake of underestimating talent or good ideas on the Dem side. I remember how we all laughing at crazy Howard Dean's "50 State Plan" for the DNC. What a dopey idea to open offices in the deep South, right? Well, Howard got the last laugh. His 50 State Plan was a huge success and now Michael Steele wants to copy it for the GOP.